Slashdot Mirror
Technological Solution For Texting While Driving Struggles For Traction
An anonymous reader writes: While legislators and police try to tackle the epidemic of distracted driving through education, regulation, and enforcement, Scott Tibbitts is trying to solve it through engineering. He developed a small device which, when plugged into a vehicle, would determine which phone belonged to the driver and shut off its texting and voice call capabilities. "The telematics box sends a wireless message that the car is moving. The phone sends its own message about its location. Both sets of information — from the car and phone — are sent to Katasi's servers. Then, an algorithm weighs the incoming data with other information, like the location of the phones belonging to all the people who drive the car and the starting point of the trip; if the trip starts at Junior's high school, and mom and dad's phones are at work, the driver has been identified — Junior is driving."
The problem is that Tibbitts can't get anyone interested in setting up a system to make these devices ubiquitous. Consumers can't be sold on such a product: all evidence suggests people are increasingly unwilling to be cut off from constant communication. So, he tried working with carriers. Sprint partnered with Tibbitts long enough to test the device, but they were afraid of the legal risks involved. Now, Tibbitts is nursing the technology along, looking for a way to get it into cars and make people safer.
The problem is that Tibbitts can't get anyone interested in setting up a system to make these devices ubiquitous. Consumers can't be sold on such a product: all evidence suggests people are increasingly unwilling to be cut off from constant communication. So, he tried working with carriers. Sprint partnered with Tibbitts long enough to test the device, but they were afraid of the legal risks involved. Now, Tibbitts is nursing the technology along, looking for a way to get it into cars and make people safer.
If someone has so little self-control as to be unable to avoid talking or texting while driving, why are we allowing them to drive in the first place?
The energy in a 4,000lb vehicle moving at 40-60 mph is considerable.
Perhaps we need stricter drivers license requirements?
Hey I've got a technical solution to this problem, too: TURN OFF THE MOTHERFUCKING PHONE!
I predict idiots putting their phones in the passenger seat, and leaning over in addition to their previous phone use. Unless this is a device that can be unplugged, in which case they'll unplug it and then use their phone.
The technological solution to this problem is self-driving cars.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
How about we just put lights on top of cars that light up brightly when a text message is being sent from anyone in the car? Then the rest of the drivers on the road can avoid those idiots, as the ones who have texting passengers in the car (aside from taxis and such) are generally no better than the ones who are attempting to text while driving.
The bright light would also make it easier for cops to know who to pull over when they are doing enhanced patrols for these shit-heads as well.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Fines and public education work better than a technical solution to stupidity. People understand when it hits their wallet directly and when their phones are confiscated.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
See, here's the thing. Fuck Scott Tibbitts.
I don't want his technology. There are so many scenarios where this would unnecessarily screw up my life. What if I'm driving and my wife wants to use my phone to answer a call? That's just one.
More importantly, my car has a built in hands free that I can operate by voice. Why should I not be allowed to use it.
If we really want to make the roads safer, give me the power to arrest the dipshits that fly around me on the Interstate doing 20 miles above the speed limit and changing lanes like they are at Daytona.
This is the wrong solution. People hate driving in general. Before texting was a thing, I would observe people reading the NYT (full blown page open in front of their steering wheel) while commuting to work.
Driving is boring, and people use whatever means possible to give themselves something interesting to do while it's occurring. Put the research into voice recognition. It's always been easier to talk than to type.
To call the police and report unsafe drivers. Why would anyone want to take that away from me?
I voted for Obama. What was the alternative, again?
Another big government stooge... Both sucked, so I didn't vote for either...
This is completely ignoring the fact that anyone in the car could be using the phone. There have been plenty of times I've been in the car when the driver gets a call and I answer it, or call someone from their phone because they had the number pre-programmed, or I'm looking up direction (or doing anything else) on their phone because their's is better than mine. While phones have become sort-of personal devices (for all you upper class families who can afford the luxury of having smart phones and data plans for each family member), they are still easily shared between people and strangers.
This still ignores the fact that the parent's phone could have been forgotten at work and Jr is not driving. There are so many other things wrong with this tech. It should be left to die.
It's 9 and 3 if you have an airbag, according to the NHTSA.
I'm skeptical as to whether there has been any benefit to 10 and 2 since power steering became common.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
His "solution" is utter bullshit, trying to capitalize on "think of the children", helicopter parenting, and potential legislation.
It's usually easy to tell whether a driver involved in an accident was texting and the penalties can be stiff (including manslaughter or vehicular homicide).
Furthermore, the right company to partner with are insurance companies, but they already have a better mechanism for monitoring in place: they don't care whether you text per se, they care whether you drive erratically for any reason. For lower insurance rates, you can agree to monitoring. Nice voluntary solution and incentive.
Finally, if there is a technical solution to be developed, it's a good voice-based, hands-free texting app that lets you text with a Bluetooth headset. Phone calls and voice interfaces are legal in most places, and will likely remain so. That's also something many people would use voluntarily because it is both safer and convenient.
Another engineer who thinks he can cobble up a single technological solution to a social problem.
This is the same sort of hubris that has legislators passing random crap to 'fix' a problem with zero understanding of the problem or the consequences of their solution. It's arrogance. For one, it assumes you're smarter (or at least sharper) than the people you're trying to control.
(Disclaimer: I'm an engineer.)
Anyone understands how this works? There are a lot of data features of my phone that pair with driving. GPS being an obvious one with traffic updates. Another is podcast downloads. And if those data networks are open then I assume most texting services other than SMS work. SMS I figure for most people is a tiny percentage of their traffic at this point. So unless they are blacklisting particular services...?
And of course phone calls have to work: reliable phone while driving is the main reason I own a cell phone in the first place. I assume I'm not alone in this.
I think easy would be adding to automated responses for all messaging services, "Driving, need to give you a long response, call my cell."
I'm not going to give a third party who is not strictly regulated in how and what can be done with this information permission to track my location 24/7 in order to tell if I'm driving my car or someone else is just to disable communications.
This. I can't believe he thought his solution was reasonable when "all" it has to do is have a database of where your family works, goes to school, which cars you own, and, of course track your entire family's location 24/7.
FFS, I'm an engineer and I take special delight in degenerate solutions, but this is fucked up.
Maybe this is a degenerate solutions competitive. Okay, let me try one of my own: we will have one member of the Stasi handcuffed to every licensed driver in the country, 24/365. Their job will be to monitor everyone's driving and ensure that the law is being abided. No, of *course* the Stasi member won't share the personal, private aspects of your life with the government... they're just there to keep everyone safe!
I do not need an increase in the number of ways for my communication channels to be closed regardless of how benevolent the reason. I need more guarantees that my communication channels will be open and available when I need them. Not deactivated by law enforcement or the military or the government, not jammed by tech savvy hobbyists, and certainly not deactivated by an automobile.
Root phone. Remove nanny state functionality. End of thread.