Slashdot Mirror
Honolulu Targets 'Smartphone Zombies' With Crosswalk Ban (reuters.com)
Templer421 shares news from Reuters:
A ban on pedestrians looking at mobile phones or texting while crossing the street will take effect in Hawaii's largest city in late October, as Honolulu becomes the first major U.S. city to pass legislation aimed at reducing injuries and deaths from "distracted walking." The ban comes as cities around the world grapple with how to protect phone-obsessed "smartphone zombies" from injuring themselves by stepping into traffic or running into stationary objects. Starting Oct. 25, Honolulu pedestrians can be fined between $15 and $99, depending on the number of times police catch them looking at a phone or tablet device as they cross the street, Mayor Kirk Caldwell told reporters gathered near one of the city's busiest downtown intersections on Thursday... People making calls for emergency services are exempt from the ban... Opponents of the Honolulu law argued it infringes on personal freedom and amounts to government overreach.
Meanwhile, the city of London has tried putting pads on their lamp posts "to soften the blow for distracted walkers."
Meanwhile, the city of London has tried putting pads on their lamp posts "to soften the blow for distracted walkers."
If you can't pull your eyes away from your phone long enough to safely cross a street... whoever hits you is helping Darwin and they're the one and only person getting my sympathy.
Legislation SHOULD be passed... freeing the motorist from liability.
If your dumb enough to be that distracted, you have no place in the gene pool.
and it's not just a problem with millennials. I see old ass people like me staring at their devices while they walk as well.
If you're not smart enough to pay attention to what's going on around you in a BUSY GODDAMN CITY LIKE BOSTON, then you don't belong in the gene pool.
Apple should include a free pack of 5 get out of "distracted walking free" cards with each new iPhone, becAUSE THE PHONE IS SO DAMN EXPENSIVE.. (channeling Sam Kinison)
Let them walk to their deaths! The fewer the better! Make Hawaii Great Again!
So I grew up in the 1950's, when there was one phone company in the whole of the United States, and phones were large, heavy, corded objects.
I'm all for the mobile revolution, except in certain particulars. Of course not all phone users do these things, but plenty enough to instill what I see as a significant negative cultural impact:
- People go out to socialize with others, but they don't. They are all heads-down in their phones, ignoring the people they are with, or at best, Facebooking back and forth instead of just talking to the real person in front of them.
- People don't pay attention to their surroundings. They are heads-down in the phones while walking, driving cars, riding bikes, driving motorboats, flying airplanes, sitting in classrooms. It's fine if they want to endanger themselves, but I've been in near accidents only avoided because _I_ was paying attention.
- People seem to care not one whit for the privacy of themselves or anyone they associate with. They install calculator apps that request permission to scrape their contact list and call history, and they cheerfully grant it, in the process giving away not only their own social graph but that of their friends and family. They don't care about giving every bit of data about their lives for Facebook to package up, profile, and sell.
- You don't see it as much among older folks, but younger people use these devices to measure their social popularity and rank it relative to others.
- People's attention spans have fallen to that of a gnat due to the constant need to check their social media updates.
There are widespread benefits to this technology, without a doubt, but there are also many social problems coming because we have the intelligence to use these devices but not the wisdom. We've gained benefits but paid a price of addiction. The popularization of mobile computing among the public has been one of the defining cultural shifts of my lifetime, and not entirely for the better.
In response to American football players being injured, they developed better helmet technology to soften the blow. This resulted in football players hitting each other harder, which we now suspect has led to endemic CTE among football players.
The more effective solution would be to electrify the lamp posts so they give you a safe but unpleasant shock if you walk into them (since apparently the blow isn't enough to discourage people from not watching where they are going). OTOH, if you wish to accept that people are going to text while on the sidewalk but wish to avoid collisions, the better solution is a moving walkway.
maybe the blind can accurately text without looking.
Has anyone actually died from this?
Instead of a monetary penalty, just close their most active social media account each time they get caught. ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
If Honolulu *REALLY* wanted to target smartphone zombies, they would do nothing. This seems like a problem that solves itself.
In HI you can drive and mess your phone all you want with absolutely zero fine, penalty or consequence.
Because it's the PEDESTRIANS that cause all the harm in a collision.
Back-assword thinking.
Actually, it's because it's expensive for everyone when a motorist runs one of them down.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
We should be celebrating the death of the low-I.Q. members of our societies, not protect them!
#DeleteFacebook
West coast US and Hawaii vying for worst nanny state. Progressives never fail to fuck it up.
Also it's irrelevant because you the driver are going to get sued no matter who was at fault. Fact.
It's obviously an attempt to target African-Americans. On the other hand, it would be funny if there was a video of an African-American being arrested for using his cell phone while crossing a crosswalk, only for it to be discovered his cell phone wasn't even on, like he was just pretending to talk to someone and he was actually just talking to himself! LOL
We make our laws like everyone is born with a SUV strapped to our asses.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
The point is apparently to target pedestrians who are struck in crosswalks by vehicles that fail to yield to them. Theoretically, we could instead enforce existing laws against illegal driving. But why do that?
random people walking around minding their own business.
You mean endangering others around them.
When I was a kid, before pre-teens had cell phones, I read books while walking home from school. I had a number of close calls with vehicles when crossing streets while reading Asimov or Clarke. I almost want to take a trip to Honolulu with a few paperbacks just to publicly mock the fact that this legislation doesn't actually fix the problem it tries to fix.
Maybe they could just assign a point system to these smartphone zombies, and like lotteries, use the funds for state education programs.
random people walking around minding their own business.
You mean random people walking around on public streets while not minding their own business, but instead imposing a cost upon others.
Government jerks found a new excuse to steal $15 to $99 from random people walking around minding their own business.
So whats the cost to public services if someone gets run down?
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
I know it's confusing but the "City of London" is just the square mile around the Bank of England. It's not the big city which is called "London". Brick Lane isn't in "The City" - it's in the London borough of Tower Hamlets. For historical reasons that little borough got the name city first (and properly historical reasons - it's the only place explicitly mentioned in Magna Carta).
Smartphone Zombies
Drivers get points added for hitting pedestrians on phones, points subtracted for hitting those without.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
But this law seems to also cover cases where you're not endangering anyone, like zombie-crossing the street after you've seen a walk signal showing enough seconds to cross.
And in general we don't need any law about "endangering" others since we already have laws giving sufficient penalties/compensation when hurting others. Clear example of double-dipping.
Blacks don't get arrested in the US for cell phone use. They got shot for making the officer afraid for his life.
Well, blacks and that one aussie chick last week.
On second thought I like people, banning people is simply too morbid. I think a better solution is to only allow navigation and emergency apps to run on public streets.
I live in Honolulu and I walk all the time. I am careful about obeying crosswalk laws and I pay attention when crossing because my life depends on it.
Certainly I agree pedestrians shouldn't be texting, etc., while crossing, and Honolulu has a terrible problem with pedestrian fatalities (highest in the nation for senior citizen pedestrians).
But the city consistently fails to do anything about cars running lights. At any major intersection, when the 'walk' light comes on, I don't dare start to cross right away because there are always one or more cars racing through the intersection, running the red light. And the walk light stays on for exactly seven seconds at most intersections; it's illegal to start crossing once the white light goes off and the red countdown light starts.
The city considered red light cameras but rejected the idea. Of course, they bring in a host of other problems and abuses, but pedestrians won't be safe as long as drivers run lights and ignore crosswalks. Texting while crossing is just one part of the problem. But in a city that favors cars over every other mode of transportation, legislating against pedestrians will be what you see happen.
As cities struggle to figure out how much taxpayer money will be wasted protecting the stupid, I struggle as to how this will run counter to the concept of survival of the fittest.
In short, fuck those who are smart enough to operate a phone and yet too dumb and ignorant to grasp the dangers of the world around them. Let Darwin do his work already.
Hopefully this will also apply to make google glass wearing illegal on crosswalks.
I personally believe that this ongoing mission to eliminate all forms of natural selection and safeguard more and more stupid people is actually a bad thing for the human race going forward..
now why is it I can't safely cross a street when I've got right of way? I got hit about 5 years ago carrying my bike across a street with the little blue guy telling me to cross. It was a cross walk seldom used by pedestrians since I had ridden out pretty far on my bike and was gonna go back the way I came. It didn't cross the woman who hit me's mind that somebody would ever cross there, so when the light turned red she just kept going...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Why pad poles etc.? Let those morons just get hurt by their own stupid behavior, maybe it'll teach them to watch where they are going. And a good law for fining people who keep their head on their phone while crossing the street.
Pretty sure they get paid whether they are at the station or on a call. "Won't somebody think of the taxpayer" arguments are hilarious.
This is a good thing and a logical progression with regulating new technologies. Just as when cars were invented, there were very few laws, and lots of injuries and accidents, so too with any new technology society must develop new norms. Having almost run down an iPod zombie years ago, this law can't be adopted fast enough across all 50 states. At the very least, it will make the entire population aware that before crossing the street, they must disengage from their technology and then "look both ways" like we teach every child.
If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
what? those 350 lbs+ land whales brushing both sides of the aisle as they clutch their cookies and snack cakes on the way to checkout with their food stamps don't?
No it's expensive if there is socialized medicine. Otherwise it's just a little bit of body work and a good wash for the car and the street and things are good as new. The world in general is better off minus one moron.
Plans to target road zombies and supermarket zombies are afoot.
"All drivers will be required by law to be conscious whilst driving or face stiff penalties! How is that reasonable? I mean, if I've got a licence, I should be able to <looks away to play with phone, motions with hand to indicate this is a temporary interruption, never re-connects with the current arc of continuity>" a disgruntled driver responded after news of the draconian laws broke last week in California.
Requiem for the American Dream
Lawsuits have everything to do with the government, as do the legal standards under which they are conducted.
Stop being a moron, roman_mir, you just aren't entertaining.
Are we talking about those who act in an arbitrary manner, as if by randomly-selecting the next course of action OR people chosen arbitrarily from the general population?
Requiem for the American Dream
Glad to hear I can still look at my laptop while crossing the street while in Honolulu!
Website Just Down For Me? Find out
And yet you've made it this far. You have the compassion and IQ of a hockey puck. I hope that if you are ever in need of help that the people around you are better than you are because you will be in serious trouble if they are anything like you.
No it's expensive if there is socialized medicine. Otherwise it's just a little bit of body work and a good wash for the car and the street and things are good as new. The world in general is better off minus one moron.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the broken window fallacy as a human being. Kind of.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
68% of the victims are male
67% under the age of 30
we already have laws giving sufficient penalties/compensation when hurting others
Suppose I don't consent to being hurt in the first place just so you can live in libertarian utopia?
In iOS 11, Apple is implementing Do Not Disturb For Driving, in which your iPhone will stop sending and receiving texts if you are in your car and it's moving.
I propose Do Not Disturb For Pedestrians, in which your GPS location while in urban areas is continually checked against Apple Maps. When you're in a street, your display is replaced by a big red LOOK UP banner.
As well as breaking right of way, not stopping at stop, parking on bike lanes, parking on handicapped spaces, burning red light at nights, on lights which do not have a camera, etc...etc... And goddman how often when a car discussion happen everybody and their grandma tells they know better than the speed limit, speed and can speed whatever they want. If there is nobody to penalize them cars do break the law on regular basis. But bike very rarely kills (I am sure somebody can fish out a few cases) whereas cars kills by the ten thousands per years, not counting heavy casualty.
If you want to have a real effect, try to enforce existing laws on cars, then we can expand on bike or pedestrian.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Yes, justifying or excusing stealing (or other evil acts) tends to involve such conceptions.
American police have complete immunity when they launch sickening physical attacks of citizens of the 'wrong' genetic makeup for 'crimes' like 'jaywalking'. Social engineering laws in nations where the enforcement employees are brutes with legal immunity, a taste for murder, and a powerful unaccountable union, are a recipe for DISASTER.
Braindead white middleclass yanks always hit forums like this one to tell us of their love of the steroid taking ex-war crime commiting soldiers who have a license to murder- that is unless said braindead idiot has experienced at first hand what disadvantaged groups experience daily in the USA.
Citizens are NOT slaves- despite what yanks are taught at school. If the stupid use of a phone is to impact the legal life of a pedestrian, it should be when the person who hits them with their vehicle is protected from prosecution. Otherwise leave the idiot pedestrain alone.
Neo-liberals now join with neo-cons in stating that US citizens should live under a regime of as many laws as possible- not the fewest. Knuckledragging cretins will always excuse more new laws in the name of societal control- by which they mean the control of 'the other' of course.
These same knuckledraggers- who today are mostly Clinton voters- never notice how in better nations the jails are few and mostly empty, and the people there live under far more decent legal systems without the need of murderous racist brutes disguised as 'police officers'. In yankland, more laws means more lawbreakers means more courts means more prisons means more brutal policing means more laws. How thick is the average yank not to notice this vcious circle?
That's the justification given, but in reality Honolulu PD already gives out $300 tickets for jaywalking. Not during the day when town is busy and plenty of people are crossing the street on red when they can do so safely. No... HPD gives out tickets at quiet times, when there's little to no traffic, hence zero justification for safety, and it's easy to single out the few pedestrians who are around.
j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
Government jerks found a new excuse to steal $15 to $99 from random people walking around minding their own business.
"The government" here is you and me. They simply represent us. And since "we" (as a society) need revenue to function, "we" need to decide where best to get this income.
Personally I am happy for it to be taken from stupid people rather than myself. And they are not "minding their own business" they are being injured and negatively impacting the lives of others. This is the best type of reason for taking money off citizens and into the public purse.
is called natural selection.
Shouldn't we just let these "cell phone zombies" continue to do what they're doing? They're the weakest members of the herd and we don't want them reproducing.
"Politicians always tell the truth, when they're calling each other liars."
If Londoners are walking into poles and getting hurt, keep the poles unpadded so they learn. How many times is someone likely to make that embarrassing and painful mistake before they learn to look where they're going? "Not that many" is my bet.
Government jerks found a new excuse to steal $15 to $99 from random people walking around minding their own business.
Yes, but they're stealing it from careless, inconsiderate, phone addled jerks.
This reduces their requirement to extract money from me, being perfectly capable of not stupidly walking out in front of cars because I've stupidly buried my head in my phone.
This is a tax on stupid jerks... I'm in no way unhappy with that.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
It's expensive even if there isn't socialized healthcare, because with private healthcare you pay a higher cost every time you go to the doctor in order to offset the free treatment the doctors give to people who can not afford it. Likewise your insurance company will price their policies to cover the idiots paying for private insurance as well as yourself. They still have to balance their "private" budget the same way a "public" health care provider would. Unless you can convince society to let injured people die on the streets without care you will pay for it one way or the other.
Need I say more?
Here's one: how 'bout zombiephones keep track of where you are, and pause when you're in the street?
This is more about not socializing the costs of stupidity.
There is definitely a big difference in price between private and public care all other things being equal. Private tends to be much less so. Not to mention the quantity of stupidity tends to go up with when there is a public safety net.
The average person won't run someone down in the street with their car if they can avoid it 99.9% of the time, but that doesn't mean they give a rats ass about people other than maybe abstractly. The only difference is I don't pretend to I care. I also go out of my way to not to have to rely on other people, because frankly most people are not very reliable. If you live your life waiting for everyone else to bail you out/rescue you when it counts you are going to die.