Until this can match the performance of the NVIDIA VDPAU I'm not interested. I need performance and functionality. So far ATI hasn't delivered that and while this is a step forward it's a bit late in the game. Wake me when they do something like the ION chipset that NVIDIA has done so I can have high performance video decoding and rendering on a low power CPU. If they had done this say two years ago or had better performing closed source drivers I might have chosen to use their stuff. They are way late to this party...
Why are you so against that method of delivery? I have completely filled all of my shelves and getting books this way is nice - I can carry a thousand around with me if I wanted to - easily. I receive a Sci-Fi magazine this way and it's much nicer than having stacks of those around! When the content was reasonably priced I was all for it. But propping up brick and mortar business and printing presses with high prices on this is dumb! Ebooks are as easy to read as paper, more so really, so I truly like the format. Have you ever tried reading a book on a reader? Not an LCD but an e-ink reader? It's pretty easy on the eyes and I can read for hours on them...
Just a small nit. If the "they" in your statement is Amazon then you need to revise how you think about this. Amazon is no longer setting the prices for the majority of their ebook sales - the publishers are! That is why 6months ago prices jumped $4 or mroe per book overnight. Here's the latest example of a book that I WAS going to buy for my Kindle and am now going to look for in the used book store if I buy it at all http://www.amazon.com/Science-Fear-Culture-Manipulates-ebook/dp/B001AO0GOK/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2
Note where it says "This price was set by the publisher". That wasn't Amazon's idea. In fact you can thank Apple for setting the precedent in this arena when the iPad was released. Amazon tried to stop this and drop those books from their catalog but all of the publishers banded together on it. MacMillen led the charge -> http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/
Those be the asshole you're looking for not Amazon. I do agree that ads would suck, when I see one I'll get upset about it. Right now I want reasonably priced ebooks back - not ebooks that cost MORE than hardcover!!!
It's not happening because big publishing, like big music, owns most of the authors. This is changing but not fast enough and the publishers are GREEDY. A good resource to read http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/ There's a good author blog out there too that I don't have handy that talks about how self publishing through Amazon is making the author some really good cash as opposed to using the typical NYC publishers. For now though we must live with most prices being set by the publishers - this price increase has completely halted my buying of ebooks. Actually it's halted my buying of books in general much liek the music industry halted my CD buying. If history holds I'll be back to buying books in another 3-4 years.
Note that it says "This price was set by the publisher". MacMillen led the charge for control of ebook pricing on all platforms. Apple was the first to sign the deal allowing this in their attempt to try and break into this industry. Supposedly the industry, the publishers, get LESS money on each sale than they did before. Rocket scientists aren't they?
Don't be pissed off at Amazon about the prices. Amazon actually has a program that allows authors to self publish with them and the authors that do make MORE money than they do via traditional publishing. A couple of them have blogs documenting this but I don't have the link handy. I think ads are a mistake, I'll believe Amazon is this stupid when I see more than a patent app and actually see such an ad in a book. Assuming of course that prices ever come down enough for me to be willing to buy another ebook. I stopped 6months ago when this crap began. Prices on Kindle books jumped as much as $4 overnight when this hit and they have yet to come down. That book I linked is just the latest one I wanted and didn't buy because of it. I could easily find ten more just like it if I tried... Oh do note how long ago that book was published. So much for publishers claims that they would drop prices over time - I guess Penguin didn't sign up for that deal.
People who buy Kindles read more, I know I sure do - or did. Then the publishers got greedy, took over the pricing, and now ebooks cost as much or more than paper books if they are produced by a major publisher. Here's the latest book I WAS interested in http://www.amazon.com/Science-Fear-Culture-Manipulates-ebook/dp/B001AO0GOK/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2 It was first published TWO YEARS ago. The ebook costs more than the hardcover and I cannot lend, share, nor sell it when done.
Actually ebooks are now often MORE expensive than paper books. Seriously. Here's the latest book I WAS looking to buy from Amazon - note the chart with the prices
This is bullshit! Gee, are sales down? Maybe it's because you now charge more for an ebook than the paper version can be gotten for and everyone is simply pirating the content instead? Stupid asshat publishers have screwed their industry and are whining as Amazon eats their lunch as a publisher. Gee, where have I seen that before?! These guys should pay attention to what has occurred with the music industry.
The day ebooks rose above the $9 I had been paying for them (for well over a year!) is the day I ceased buying. That these morons cannot make a PROFIT or rather enough profit on "books" that now have no printing overhead is a complete joke and so far as I'm concerned they can go under. MacMillan http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/ led this charge to set their own prices over Amazon - overnight prices rose as much as $6 per book. The claim that their profits are being squeezed is pure crap. The idea, from one fo the linked articles, that these new prices is somehow a panacea for Amazon is also a joke since everyone I know who owns one is pissed off about the price increases and are buying far fewer books - just like me. That includes fewer paper books too now that I prefer them electronically. The most amusing statement from these bozos was MacMillan actually stating that paper book costs are expensive to support as part of their reasoning for high ebook prices. WTF?! http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/answers-to-some-questions-from-the-comments/#more-60 Their claim that ebooks provide special benefits over paper, are still discounted off of hardcover list (such a bargain), and are a good value even when costing more than paper books further shows how out of touch these idiots are. Wake me when I can sell them, trade them, or share them. These guys make the music industry look like geniuses!
Amazon - putting ads in ebooks is a bad idea. They will get yanked just like commercials do in TV show torrents and yeah for some reason book torrents are on the rise. I wonder why? What a complete mess....
At least authors are beginning to get a clue and self publish. Those that have been sharing numbers via blogs are making a good bit more going on their own via Amazon etc. at low prices vs using established publishers. Some of them are actually making a living getting more money from Amazon than their publishers selling their rejected books! Frankly it's a shame that it's taking the authors so long to do this - current book prices are too high and adding in ads won't make anyone happy. I'll believe Amazon is this stupid when I see one in an ebook - if I ever find one cheap enough that I will buy. I was buying several books a month at $9.99 or less, it's been at least 6months since I last bought a book and yes there have been at least 10 that I wanted. Some of them were priced as high as $15 for the ebook and were published over 5 years ago! This wasn't the case before the publishers got greedy and began setting prices themselves....
Well to be fair, it seems that these interlocks are being proposed for folks who are on a probation vs sitting in jail. Part of their terms for probation is that they not consume ANY alcohol.
That said - lets put them on all cars and set them at the limit. It would be a very interesting social experiment. Sort of akin to someone perfecting the perfect DRM and forcing everyone to actually obey some of the draconian laws\rules. The backlash to either of these would be most amusing to me...
Sadly I wouldn't trust their opinion. I'd prefer something unbiased and empirical TBH. The parent makes a good point - have we already passed the point of sense? Is lowering the limits doing anything more than bringing in revenue? Have traffic deaths from this cause gone down or remained steady?
Frankly I don't find driving to be a great challenge. You make it sound like rocket science following the rules of the road and keeping it between the lines - it's not.
That said, I seldom drink and when I do I don't drive within a reasonable amount of time. Alcohol, and drugs too actually, don't draw me but I'm not foolish enough to try and push this on others - you will never reach zero risk and the returns are diminishing as you get closer. Not drinking is a choice that many aren't willing to make - especially if it's just one beer or perhaps two at a longer dinner. The chances of a single drink meaning the difference between life and death is pretty damned slim - accidents can be caused by mistakes but seldom is the tiniest fraction of a second all it would have taken to avoid them. Life has risks or it's not living, you cannot eliminate risk. I'd bet that the myriad of prescription drugs dispensed in this country has a FAR higher impact than a single drink at dinner!
As for airline pilots and bus drivers - what makes you think they don't drink? Sure there are rules but I think you'll note there aren't breath tubes next to any of their seats either and last I checked they were all human....
I won't spend the rest of my life wondering what if any more than I will let the thought that I might prevent me from living my life. If I let the what ifs rule me I'd never get out of bed!
Spoken like someone who lives in or near a major city where such suggestions are practical. I live three miles from work currently, I'm about to move a little further out to be a whopping ten miles - in an area where 30-40miles is common. I have ridden my bike to work just once and was nearly run down for it. My ten mile commute is a non-starter since it would require riding on a much more dangerous road. (!) Public transit is a great idea - it's nearly non-existent where I'm at and when I did take it for a more distant commute my commute time went from one hour to TWO hours each way. FOUR hours of my life on buses and trains is a complete waste! Moving each time I'm place din a new position for work is also a non-starter since I own a home and don't wish to become a renter somewhere. Your suggestions are short-sighted and not practical for most folks in the United States. Perhaps you live somewhere a bit more tightly packed?
Yeah, with rare exception it seems like most everyone is on sort of mood modifier these days! With the exception of people obviously out of it do they even check for this in the case of most accidents? I'm betting not, alcohol is just so much easier to go after and probably rightfully so since it's a case of someone self medicating...
You said "drinks". Plural. do you realize that depending upon what you drink, just one, and how long you wait you could be subject to a DWI for just one drink? I'm not for people drinking and driving but I think that everyone making it out to be someone else's problem and something THEY never do would be surprised to find out that under current laws THEY probably ARE. At what point do we draw the line? Zero alcohol? At what point is there no impairment or so little as to not make a difference? Does such a level exist? Do you wish to live in a society where in order to have a single drink at a meal out you cannot then drive home? Public transit in so very many areas, including mine, sucks. Cabs are certainly an option of course but depending upon distance will easily double the cost of your night out. I avoid this by not drinking when I'm out but society as a whole doesn't act this way and I do not think they should be forced to.
I don't know where to draw the line but I think it's almost amusing to see so many people act like it's not something they ever do or that the solution is so easy when in fact it's not. You list some harsh penalties, i hope you realize just how easily you could be one of the ones facing them if you drink at all. if you don't drink then perhaps you aren't taking into account the social impacts of what you propose... As it stands now many people, especially elderly, who have their licenses taken drive anyway - they feel they must. The penalties you wish to invoke will skyrocket this practice and most certainly lead to some wild endangering chases as those guilty flee the inevitable harsh penalties. What then? Execution? Exile? Prison? What further penalty? Think it through....
Frankly, taking drivers out of the equation and having cars that drive themselves from place to place might be the answer. It would suck the soul out of me not to be able to tweak and tune a car or drive fast but... it would solve many things - at great monetary cost...
Ah, now see that sheds some light on this and why the limit is so low. This now makes a little more sense to me! I'm still a bit mixed about it, particularly since limits keep getting lower and lower like a game of one upsmanship but i now better understand. I do think we'll eventually see this in all new cars, the sooner the better perhaps so that people can begin to feel some heat over what they have brought on themselves. I don't drink hardly ever and not at all within hours of driving but the pace at which some of these laws are tightening down makes me uncomfortable.
Nah, I think this should be in every car. The limits it senses should also be just a C hair above ZERO too. Think of the children! Think of the lives saved!
Why should we wait for people to prove that they cannot make wise decisions? Lets just install these on all cars to be sure! Maybe make them standard now like tire pressure sensors for those too stupid to check that? After all we lost FAR fewer people to accidents involving low tire pressures and SUVs and we created a law right? This way we could be certain that these no good drunks ever got into a different car other than their own right? Where's the down side? Why would you be against such a thing - you're not FOR drinking and riving are you?
Laws used to be fairly permissive. for good reason they have gotten stronger as society has realized that this is a pretty stupid thing to do. However while this has been realized politicians saw it as a way to make great political hay. So they seem to be racing each other to ever lower limits and ever higher penalties. I'm not surprised at all about this honestly. I bet if you examine the limit in your County or State and looked into how easy you can get to that limit you might find it surprising how easy it is.
Your neighbor may not be telling you the whole truth and this might not be his first offense either. However he's been branded now and as you can see from some of the responses here it doesn't matter to the indignant "innocent" how much inconvenience is heaped upon him. This is the sort of crime where you're assumed guilty first and hey for the bonus round they might even post your picture in the paper or on FaceBook to really kick you when you're down...
What will happen when you have one drink, get popped, and you discover that the limits are now so low that YOU are the one having to install one of these? Will you be so high and mighty then? Why not just set the limits to zero and be done with it? Drinking and driving is bad mmkay? But at some point we're going to hit bottom in this little political race to outdo one another and realize that it's a bit insane.
How about this, lets just install them in ALL cars? That will stop this problem cold won't it? See how that flies at the local bar and grill or winery why don't you. If the device detects any alcohol in your system it won't start. You okay with that? Family will be safe right? If you say no then are you advocating drinking and driving?
I've seen drive-thru liquor stores in Maryland and I'm pretty sure there are still some drive-thru daiquiri places around. Why this is considered acceptable I dunno' but okay. I do still recall the days of open containers and of even seeing someone drinking a beer while driving down the road. I don't miss those days or the pop tabs left all over the place! Not sure you cold even drink a full beer these days and no be above the limits, certainly not a full mixed drink I'd bet...
When I was in school someone distributed DAMM stickers. That's Drunks Against Mad Mothers. I laughed but apparently the faculty found it a hanging offense or somesuch.
They will feel this way right up until they realize one day they cannot have a single drink and then get behind the wheel for multiple hours. I abhor drunk driving but this is a race to the bottom with every politician looking to outdo others in order to look like they are tackling "the problem". Everyone will jump on the bandwagon and the frog in the pot will sit there happily till fully boiled.
How sensitive are the devices being used to measure this? What's their margin of error? How long till we get to the point that swishing with mouthwash before leaving for work in the morning is enough to get us a conviction? DUI and DWI is a problem for sure but ever lower limits aren't going to solve it - it's political grandstanding. Everyone is for it until pretty soon we all wear a scarlet letter....
Mind you this from someone who has had friends killed by DWI drivers and one who also seldom drinks. I do not see lowering the limits helping. Not sure how I feel about the interlocks either. Maybe we ought to put them on all cars? It would be VERY amusing to see the large numbers of people who have never had a DUI suddenly unable to start their cars after a dinner out with limits going ever lower.
We're talking about a society ruled by so many nannies that we actually have manufacturers changing the design of cars to prevent pedestrian injuries when struck. Wouldn't we be smarter to just learn to better avoid them? The mind boggles!
Slashdot Mirror
Until this can match the performance of the NVIDIA VDPAU I'm not interested. I need performance and functionality. So far ATI hasn't delivered that and while this is a step forward it's a bit late in the game. Wake me when they do something like the ION chipset that NVIDIA has done so I can have high performance video decoding and rendering on a low power CPU. If they had done this say two years ago or had better performing closed source drivers I might have chosen to use their stuff. They are way late to this party...
Why are you so against that method of delivery? I have completely filled all of my shelves and getting books this way is nice - I can carry a thousand around with me if I wanted to - easily. I receive a Sci-Fi magazine this way and it's much nicer than having stacks of those around! When the content was reasonably priced I was all for it. But propping up brick and mortar business and printing presses with high prices on this is dumb! Ebooks are as easy to read as paper, more so really, so I truly like the format. Have you ever tried reading a book on a reader? Not an LCD but an e-ink reader? It's pretty easy on the eyes and I can read for hours on them...
Just a small nit. If the "they" in your statement is Amazon then you need to revise how you think about this. Amazon is no longer setting the prices for the majority of their ebook sales - the publishers are! That is why 6months ago prices jumped $4 or mroe per book overnight. Here's the latest example of a book that I WAS going to buy for my Kindle and am now going to look for in the used book store if I buy it at all http://www.amazon.com/Science-Fear-Culture-Manipulates-ebook/dp/B001AO0GOK/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2
Note where it says "This price was set by the publisher". That wasn't Amazon's idea. In fact you can thank Apple for setting the precedent in this arena when the iPad was released. Amazon tried to stop this and drop those books from their catalog but all of the publishers banded together on it. MacMillen led the charge -> http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/
Those be the asshole you're looking for not Amazon. I do agree that ads would suck, when I see one I'll get upset about it. Right now I want reasonably priced ebooks back - not ebooks that cost MORE than hardcover!!!
It's not happening because big publishing, like big music, owns most of the authors. This is changing but not fast enough and the publishers are GREEDY. A good resource to read http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/ There's a good author blog out there too that I don't have handy that talks about how self publishing through Amazon is making the author some really good cash as opposed to using the typical NYC publishers. For now though we must live with most prices being set by the publishers - this price increase has completely halted my buying of ebooks. Actually it's halted my buying of books in general much liek the music industry halted my CD buying. If history holds I'll be back to buying books in another 3-4 years.
Nah, they admit it's because they also need to support their print industry http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/answers-to-some-questions-from-the-comments/#more-60
http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/ There's your culprit NOT Amazon! Looks closely at this Kindle book http://www.amazon.com/Science-Fear-Culture-Manipulates-ebook/dp/B001AO0GOK/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2
Note that it says "This price was set by the publisher". MacMillen led the charge for control of ebook pricing on all platforms. Apple was the first to sign the deal allowing this in their attempt to try and break into this industry. Supposedly the industry, the publishers, get LESS money on each sale than they did before. Rocket scientists aren't they?
Don't be pissed off at Amazon about the prices. Amazon actually has a program that allows authors to self publish with them and the authors that do make MORE money than they do via traditional publishing. A couple of them have blogs documenting this but I don't have the link handy. I think ads are a mistake, I'll believe Amazon is this stupid when I see more than a patent app and actually see such an ad in a book. Assuming of course that prices ever come down enough for me to be willing to buy another ebook. I stopped 6months ago when this crap began. Prices on Kindle books jumped as much as $4 overnight when this hit and they have yet to come down. That book I linked is just the latest one I wanted and didn't buy because of it. I could easily find ten more just like it if I tried... Oh do note how long ago that book was published. So much for publishers claims that they would drop prices over time - I guess Penguin didn't sign up for that deal.
People who buy Kindles read more, I know I sure do - or did. Then the publishers got greedy, took over the pricing, and now ebooks cost as much or more than paper books if they are produced by a major publisher. Here's the latest book I WAS interested in http://www.amazon.com/Science-Fear-Culture-Manipulates-ebook/dp/B001AO0GOK/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2 It was first published TWO YEARS ago. The ebook costs more than the hardcover and I cannot lend, share, nor sell it when done.
Thank these asshats -> http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/
Actually ebooks are now often MORE expensive than paper books. Seriously. Here's the latest book I WAS looking to buy from Amazon - note the chart with the prices
http://www.amazon.com/Science-Fear-Shouldnt-Ourselves-Greater/dp/B001U0OGAY/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0
I haven't found a torrent - yet. I won't buy the paper version. This is by far not the first ebook I've found in this situation.
Blame MacMillan, they are the ones who led the industry to shooting itself in the foot http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/
This is bullshit! Gee, are sales down? Maybe it's because you now charge more for an ebook than the paper version can be gotten for and everyone is simply pirating the content instead? Stupid asshat publishers have screwed their industry and are whining as Amazon eats their lunch as a publisher. Gee, where have I seen that before?! These guys should pay attention to what has occurred with the music industry.
The day ebooks rose above the $9 I had been paying for them (for well over a year!) is the day I ceased buying. That these morons cannot make a PROFIT or rather enough profit on "books" that now have no printing overhead is a complete joke and so far as I'm concerned they can go under. MacMillan http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/ led this charge to set their own prices over Amazon - overnight prices rose as much as $6 per book. The claim that their profits are being squeezed is pure crap. The idea, from one fo the linked articles, that these new prices is somehow a panacea for Amazon is also a joke since everyone I know who owns one is pissed off about the price increases and are buying far fewer books - just like me. That includes fewer paper books too now that I prefer them electronically. The most amusing statement from these bozos was MacMillan actually stating that paper book costs are expensive to support as part of their reasoning for high ebook prices. WTF?! http://blog.macmillanspeaks.com/answers-to-some-questions-from-the-comments/#more-60 Their claim that ebooks provide special benefits over paper, are still discounted off of hardcover list (such a bargain), and are a good value even when costing more than paper books further shows how out of touch these idiots are. Wake me when I can sell them, trade them, or share them. These guys make the music industry look like geniuses!
Amazon - putting ads in ebooks is a bad idea. They will get yanked just like commercials do in TV show torrents and yeah for some reason book torrents are on the rise. I wonder why? What a complete mess....
At least authors are beginning to get a clue and self publish. Those that have been sharing numbers via blogs are making a good bit more going on their own via Amazon etc. at low prices vs using established publishers. Some of them are actually making a living getting more money from Amazon than their publishers selling their rejected books! Frankly it's a shame that it's taking the authors so long to do this - current book prices are too high and adding in ads won't make anyone happy. I'll believe Amazon is this stupid when I see one in an ebook - if I ever find one cheap enough that I will buy. I was buying several books a month at $9.99 or less, it's been at least 6months since I last bought a book and yes there have been at least 10 that I wanted. Some of them were priced as high as $15 for the ebook and were published over 5 years ago! This wasn't the case before the publishers got greedy and began setting prices themselves....
Then you simply aren't heating the water slowly enough if William Thompson Sedgwick is to be believed ;-)
Well to be fair, it seems that these interlocks are being proposed for folks who are on a probation vs sitting in jail. Part of their terms for probation is that they not consume ANY alcohol.
That said - lets put them on all cars and set them at the limit. It would be a very interesting social experiment. Sort of akin to someone perfecting the perfect DRM and forcing everyone to actually obey some of the draconian laws\rules. The backlash to either of these would be most amusing to me...
Sadly I wouldn't trust their opinion. I'd prefer something unbiased and empirical TBH. The parent makes a good point - have we already passed the point of sense? Is lowering the limits doing anything more than bringing in revenue? Have traffic deaths from this cause gone down or remained steady?
Frankly I don't find driving to be a great challenge. You make it sound like rocket science following the rules of the road and keeping it between the lines - it's not.
That said, I seldom drink and when I do I don't drive within a reasonable amount of time. Alcohol, and drugs too actually, don't draw me but I'm not foolish enough to try and push this on others - you will never reach zero risk and the returns are diminishing as you get closer. Not drinking is a choice that many aren't willing to make - especially if it's just one beer or perhaps two at a longer dinner. The chances of a single drink meaning the difference between life and death is pretty damned slim - accidents can be caused by mistakes but seldom is the tiniest fraction of a second all it would have taken to avoid them. Life has risks or it's not living, you cannot eliminate risk. I'd bet that the myriad of prescription drugs dispensed in this country has a FAR higher impact than a single drink at dinner!
As for airline pilots and bus drivers - what makes you think they don't drink? Sure there are rules but I think you'll note there aren't breath tubes next to any of their seats either and last I checked they were all human....
I won't spend the rest of my life wondering what if any more than I will let the thought that I might prevent me from living my life. If I let the what ifs rule me I'd never get out of bed!
Spoken like someone who lives in or near a major city where such suggestions are practical. I live three miles from work currently, I'm about to move a little further out to be a whopping ten miles - in an area where 30-40miles is common. I have ridden my bike to work just once and was nearly run down for it. My ten mile commute is a non-starter since it would require riding on a much more dangerous road. (!) Public transit is a great idea - it's nearly non-existent where I'm at and when I did take it for a more distant commute my commute time went from one hour to TWO hours each way. FOUR hours of my life on buses and trains is a complete waste! Moving each time I'm place din a new position for work is also a non-starter since I own a home and don't wish to become a renter somewhere. Your suggestions are short-sighted and not practical for most folks in the United States. Perhaps you live somewhere a bit more tightly packed?
Yeah, with rare exception it seems like most everyone is on sort of mood modifier these days! With the exception of people obviously out of it do they even check for this in the case of most accidents? I'm betting not, alcohol is just so much easier to go after and probably rightfully so since it's a case of someone self medicating...
You said "drinks". Plural. do you realize that depending upon what you drink, just one, and how long you wait you could be subject to a DWI for just one drink? I'm not for people drinking and driving but I think that everyone making it out to be someone else's problem and something THEY never do would be surprised to find out that under current laws THEY probably ARE. At what point do we draw the line? Zero alcohol? At what point is there no impairment or so little as to not make a difference? Does such a level exist? Do you wish to live in a society where in order to have a single drink at a meal out you cannot then drive home? Public transit in so very many areas, including mine, sucks. Cabs are certainly an option of course but depending upon distance will easily double the cost of your night out. I avoid this by not drinking when I'm out but society as a whole doesn't act this way and I do not think they should be forced to.
I don't know where to draw the line but I think it's almost amusing to see so many people act like it's not something they ever do or that the solution is so easy when in fact it's not. You list some harsh penalties, i hope you realize just how easily you could be one of the ones facing them if you drink at all. if you don't drink then perhaps you aren't taking into account the social impacts of what you propose... As it stands now many people, especially elderly, who have their licenses taken drive anyway - they feel they must. The penalties you wish to invoke will skyrocket this practice and most certainly lead to some wild endangering chases as those guilty flee the inevitable harsh penalties. What then? Execution? Exile? Prison? What further penalty? Think it through....
Frankly, taking drivers out of the equation and having cars that drive themselves from place to place might be the answer. It would suck the soul out of me not to be able to tweak and tune a car or drive fast but... it would solve many things - at great monetary cost...
Well, I can tell you I've never been through one but man when I saw that it sure looked like just about THE worst idea ever!
Ah, now see that sheds some light on this and why the limit is so low. This now makes a little more sense to me! I'm still a bit mixed about it, particularly since limits keep getting lower and lower like a game of one upsmanship but i now better understand. I do think we'll eventually see this in all new cars, the sooner the better perhaps so that people can begin to feel some heat over what they have brought on themselves. I don't drink hardly ever and not at all within hours of driving but the pace at which some of these laws are tightening down makes me uncomfortable.
Thank you for sharing your insight!
Nah, I think this should be in every car. The limits it senses should also be just a C hair above ZERO too. Think of the children! Think of the lives saved!
Why should we wait for people to prove that they cannot make wise decisions? Lets just install these on all cars to be sure! Maybe make them standard now like tire pressure sensors for those too stupid to check that? After all we lost FAR fewer people to accidents involving low tire pressures and SUVs and we created a law right? This way we could be certain that these no good drunks ever got into a different car other than their own right? Where's the down side? Why would you be against such a thing - you're not FOR drinking and riving are you?
Burn the witch! oh wait....
Laws used to be fairly permissive. for good reason they have gotten stronger as society has realized that this is a pretty stupid thing to do. However while this has been realized politicians saw it as a way to make great political hay. So they seem to be racing each other to ever lower limits and ever higher penalties. I'm not surprised at all about this honestly. I bet if you examine the limit in your County or State and looked into how easy you can get to that limit you might find it surprising how easy it is.
Your neighbor may not be telling you the whole truth and this might not be his first offense either. However he's been branded now and as you can see from some of the responses here it doesn't matter to the indignant "innocent" how much inconvenience is heaped upon him. This is the sort of crime where you're assumed guilty first and hey for the bonus round they might even post your picture in the paper or on FaceBook to really kick you when you're down...
What will happen when you have one drink, get popped, and you discover that the limits are now so low that YOU are the one having to install one of these? Will you be so high and mighty then? Why not just set the limits to zero and be done with it? Drinking and driving is bad mmkay? But at some point we're going to hit bottom in this little political race to outdo one another and realize that it's a bit insane.
How about this, lets just install them in ALL cars? That will stop this problem cold won't it? See how that flies at the local bar and grill or winery why don't you. If the device detects any alcohol in your system it won't start. You okay with that? Family will be safe right? If you say no then are you advocating drinking and driving?
I've seen drive-thru liquor stores in Maryland and I'm pretty sure there are still some drive-thru daiquiri places around. Why this is considered acceptable I dunno' but okay. I do still recall the days of open containers and of even seeing someone drinking a beer while driving down the road. I don't miss those days or the pop tabs left all over the place! Not sure you cold even drink a full beer these days and no be above the limits, certainly not a full mixed drink I'd bet...
When I was in school someone distributed DAMM stickers. That's Drunks Against Mad Mothers. I laughed but apparently the faculty found it a hanging offense or somesuch.
They will feel this way right up until they realize one day they cannot have a single drink and then get behind the wheel for multiple hours. I abhor drunk driving but this is a race to the bottom with every politician looking to outdo others in order to look like they are tackling "the problem". Everyone will jump on the bandwagon and the frog in the pot will sit there happily till fully boiled.
How sensitive are the devices being used to measure this? What's their margin of error? How long till we get to the point that swishing with mouthwash before leaving for work in the morning is enough to get us a conviction? DUI and DWI is a problem for sure but ever lower limits aren't going to solve it - it's political grandstanding. Everyone is for it until pretty soon we all wear a scarlet letter....
Mind you this from someone who has had friends killed by DWI drivers and one who also seldom drinks. I do not see lowering the limits helping. Not sure how I feel about the interlocks either. Maybe we ought to put them on all cars? It would be VERY amusing to see the large numbers of people who have never had a DUI suddenly unable to start their cars after a dinner out with limits going ever lower.
We're talking about a society ruled by so many nannies that we actually have manufacturers changing the design of cars to prevent pedestrian injuries when struck. Wouldn't we be smarter to just learn to better avoid them? The mind boggles!