Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Fighting Distracted Driver Laws

Posted by Soulskill on from the think-of-it-as-driving-on-hard-mode dept.

Rambo Tribble writes "Reuters reports Google has initiated lobbying efforts to stymie attempts by some states to enact distracted driver laws aimed at wearable technologies, such as Google Glass. 'Google's main point to legislators is that regulation would be premature because Google Glass is not yet widely available, the state elected officials say. Illinois state Senator Ira Silverstein, a Chicago Democrat who introduced a Google Glass restriction bill in December, responded that it was clear the merchandise was heading for the broader public.' Given the toll on our highways shown to arise from distracted drivers, is this responsible corporate behavior to protect their product, or an unethical endangering of lives?"

7 of 226 comments (clear)

  1. Bill specifically about Glass is a bad idea... by Kenja · · Score: 5, Interesting

    However general legislation against using digital devices can be done right. The issue we start to run into is things like do touch screens built into the dashboard count or windscreen HUDs like what BMW has in the works.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:Bill specifically about Glass is a bad idea... by sunderland56 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Entire text of a correctly done bill here: "The use of portable electronic devices while driving a motor vehicle is prohibited".

      That would ban cell phones, texting devices, google glass, and similar - but not prohibit anything built in to the car.

    2. Re:Bill specifically about Glass is a bad idea... by koan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You don't get it, a heads up display is projected on to your field of vision, with Glass you have to look at the screen or at the road.

      So not "heads up" at all, unless of course you meant "my heads upright but I'm still a distracted Glasshole putting everyone around me in danger"
      Then yes.
      Face it it's bad tech.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    3. Re:Bill specifically about Glass is a bad idea... by bws111 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I see you know nothing about defensive driving. I'll make it easy for you: a driver is supposed to be AWARE of what is happening around him at all times. That means what is happening immediately in front of you, what is happening way down the road, what is happening to your rear, what is happening to your sides, what is happening with your vehicle. To do that, your eyes should be in motion at almost all times. What you should NEVER do is focus your gaze on any one spot, whether that spot is your phone, the rear of the car in front of you, a supposed 'heads up display', or anywhere else.

    4. Re:Bill specifically about Glass is a bad idea... by dryeo · · Score: 5, Informative

      All the evidence I've seen is that having a conversation with an occupant in the vehicle is much safer then using a cell phone. This is mostly due to the occupant having situational awareness so when some tricky piece of driving shows up, they shut up or at least know why you're ignoring them. On top of this is that an occupant can also point out dangerous situations such as yesterday when my wife screamed stop as someone was in my blind spot and going for the same parking spot I was.
      I hate talking on the cell when in traffic as the other end has no idea of what is happening and can get uptight just by the conversation being interrupted by having to shift gears.
      The dash display can be ignored whereas a heads up display can be more in your face. How often do you need to look at your dash?

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  2. Re:Based on what study by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What study has shown that it is safe to drive while eating a Big Mac?

    I'm pretty sure I've seen stories about people eating apples while driving being pulled over and prosecuted in my country (the UK), and our general laws against poor driving certainly cover that kind of case if the standard of driving is unacceptable as a result.

    I'm in two minds about technology-specific laws. On the one hand, we introduced legislation here a few years ago against driving while using a hand-held mobile phone, which promptly led to aggressive marketing about how using a hands-free kit keeps you safe. (It doesn't; the exact same research used to justify the ban on hand-held devices showed that hands-free was almost as dangerous. It was left out of the law because of concerns over unrealistic enforcement, not because it was safe.)

    On the other hand, the motivation for introducing the phone-specific law was that too many people are deluded enough to believe they can drive at their normal standard while on the phone, so they didn't think the regular laws against driving without due care and attention would apply. Every time that discussion comes up on Slashdot, plenty of people will turn up and exhibit the exact same arrogance and/or ignorance, thus proving the original motivation sound in that case. If the same is true of Google Glass or similar headsets, specific laws might be warranted in those cases as well.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  3. Re:It's not HUDs, it's what kinds of HUD by east+coast · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If using HUDs or other kinds of electronic instruments were inherently dangerous, they wouldn't routinely be used by aircraft pilots.

    When you have thousands of hours of driving theory classes, simulator time and coached road driving in a vehicle where the coach can take over the vehicle in a moments notice then you can start to talk about how your driving a car compares to a pilot in a jet.

    Most pilots have more time in simulators than most drivers get in their first few years of driving. Comparing the two is a joke and you know it.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.