5 ms·

Why not display a Recent Phone Use option when both side buttons of an Apple device is pressed? * slide to power off * Medical ID * SOS Emergency Call * Recent

Why not display a Recent Phone Use option when both side buttons of an Apple device is pressed? * slide to power off * Medical ID * SOS Emergency Call * Recent Phone Use Report would be high-level -- has phone been unlocked in last 30 minutes, if so, timestamps showing when it was unlocked, for how long, how many finger taps occurred, etc. That would give law enforcement a quick indication of whether phone was in use. Of course if there are passengers it could be contested. For more detail, they'd have to subpoena as they do now.

rideontime 3y ago
I hate people who use their phones while driving as much as the next person, but I would not buy a phone that divulged my personal information in this way.
- astrange 3y ago
  That's kind of describing Digital Wellbeing/Screen Time.
  - rideontime 3y ago
    Which I have to unlock my phone to view.
    - astrange 3y ago
      I learned from that Alaska incident that a lot of people just don't lock their phone.
- acdha 3y ago
  That is not divulging personal information in any case and the privilege of driving requires some compromises there. For example, having a medical condition actually is a private matter but the state has a compelling public safety interest to require you to disclose conditions which affect your ability to drive safely.
  - rideontime 3y ago
    If you're suggesting that the state should make driver's licenses contingent on owning a phone with a feature like this, I guess I'll just have to give up my car or my phone, then.
    - acdha 3y ago
      I’m saying that it’s reasonable for a police officer investigating a collision to ask the driver about a very common cause of collisions, just as we allow them to check for alcohol and require you to take a test if you appear to be impaired. The feature described would be a nice way to support those questions in a manner which does not reveal private information, require you to unlock the phone, or otherwise risk giving them access beyond what’s needed to answer the questions during an official investigation. You could of course choose not to use it but why you’d want to give them additional access to your device is beyond me.
      - rideontime 3y ago
        And I'm saying that I disagree with you.
        acdha 3y ago
        Sure, lots of people disagree with things but the law is what matters, not vibes. There’s a long-running precedent that investigating accidents makes it reasonable to ask what the operator of the vehicle was doing immediately before the crash.
        rideontime 3y ago
        I don’t see how that precedent applies. I can already easily answer their question without unlocking my device, and if they want evidence, they can get a warrant. Even the breathalyzer requirement seems irrelevant, considering that it only requires you to submit to a breathalyzer performed by a police officer, rather than mandating that your BAC be available to anybody with physical access to your property.
Spivak 3y ago
That data is practically useless because I'm using Google Maps and Spotify connected to my AUX neither of which I think most people consider using your phone while driving.
- asoneth 3y ago
  Ok, I'll bite. Why would most people not consider using Google Maps and Spotify on your phone to be using your phone?
  - gnicholas 3y ago
    I think the argument for these two apps would be that it's essentially identical to using the nav system and audio system of your car. If your phone is mounted and easy to reach, that's perhaps true. If you're holding it in your hand and looking down, it's less comparable.
    - pests 3y ago
      I think it's pretty clear cut that using your phone to do stuff is... using your phone. If you want a dedicated gps or music player you can buy one. In my area you can not use a phone at all while driving a motorcycle even for navigation. You are allowed to buy a dedicated gps though.
      - gnicholas 3y ago
        In CA, the rules are now the same for cellphones and dedicated GPS units. The only exception is for "manufacturer-installed systems that are embedded in the vehicle". Taken literally, this means that if you have an aftermarket CarPlay-compatible head unit, it's illegal to touch it at all, other than to turn it on or off. [1] It appears that new drivers are also forbidden from even looking at dash-mounted devices while driving. I get that they might be more easily distracted, and unable to give voice prompts while driving, but they presumably also need more help navigating, with advance lane change warnings, etc. Basically, these laws have not been especially well-calibrated, which is not surprising given that this is true for pretty much all laws regarding new technologies. 1: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/does-california-law-prohibit-using-gps-while-driving.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/does-california-law-...
singleshot_ 3y ago
I believe there have been some legal disputes concerning this approach. Some time ago the US Constitution was amended to provide clarity.
SkyPuncher 3y ago
I can’t wait for that to be used against me when I’ve been safely having my wife use my phone while I’m driving.

rideontime 3y ago

I hate people who use their phones while driving as much as the next person, but I would not buy a phone that divulged my personal information in this way.

astrange 3y ago
That's kind of describing Digital Wellbeing/Screen Time.
- rideontime 3y ago
  Which I have to unlock my phone to view.
  - astrange 3y ago
    I learned from that Alaska incident that a lot of people just don't lock their phone.
acdha 3y ago
That is not divulging personal information in any case and the privilege of driving requires some compromises there. For example, having a medical condition actually is a private matter but the state has a compelling public safety interest to require you to disclose conditions which affect your ability to drive safely.
- rideontime 3y ago
  If you're suggesting that the state should make driver's licenses contingent on owning a phone with a feature like this, I guess I'll just have to give up my car or my phone, then.
  - acdha 3y ago
    I’m saying that it’s reasonable for a police officer investigating a collision to ask the driver about a very common cause of collisions, just as we allow them to check for alcohol and require you to take a test if you appear to be impaired. The feature described would be a nice way to support those questions in a manner which does not reveal private information, require you to unlock the phone, or otherwise risk giving them access beyond what’s needed to answer the questions during an official investigation. You could of course choose not to use it but why you’d want to give them additional access to your device is beyond me.
    - rideontime 3y ago
      And I'm saying that I disagree with you.
      - acdha 3y ago
        Sure, lots of people disagree with things but the law is what matters, not vibes. There’s a long-running precedent that investigating accidents makes it reasonable to ask what the operator of the vehicle was doing immediately before the crash.
        rideontime 3y ago
        I don’t see how that precedent applies. I can already easily answer their question without unlocking my device, and if they want evidence, they can get a warrant. Even the breathalyzer requirement seems irrelevant, considering that it only requires you to submit to a breathalyzer performed by a police officer, rather than mandating that your BAC be available to anybody with physical access to your property.

Spivak 3y ago

That data is practically useless because I'm using Google Maps and Spotify connected to my AUX neither of which I think most people consider using your phone while driving.

asoneth 3y ago
Ok, I'll bite. Why would most people not consider using Google Maps and Spotify on your phone to be using your phone?
- gnicholas 3y ago
  I think the argument for these two apps would be that it's essentially identical to using the nav system and audio system of your car. If your phone is mounted and easy to reach, that's perhaps true. If you're holding it in your hand and looking down, it's less comparable.
  - pests 3y ago
    I think it's pretty clear cut that using your phone to do stuff is... using your phone. If you want a dedicated gps or music player you can buy one. In my area you can not use a phone at all while driving a motorcycle even for navigation. You are allowed to buy a dedicated gps though.
    - gnicholas 3y ago
      In CA, the rules are now the same for cellphones and dedicated GPS units. The only exception is for "manufacturer-installed systems that are embedded in the vehicle". Taken literally, this means that if you have an aftermarket CarPlay-compatible head unit, it's illegal to touch it at all, other than to turn it on or off. [1] It appears that new drivers are also forbidden from even looking at dash-mounted devices while driving. I get that they might be more easily distracted, and unable to give voice prompts while driving, but they presumably also need more help navigating, with advance lane change warnings, etc. Basically, these laws have not been especially well-calibrated, which is not surprising given that this is true for pretty much all laws regarding new technologies. 1: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/does-california-law-prohibit-using-gps-while-driving.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/does-california-law-...

singleshot_ 3y ago

I believe there have been some legal disputes concerning this approach. Some time ago the US Constitution was amended to provide clarity.

SkyPuncher 3y ago

I can’t wait for that to be used against me when I’ve been safely having my wife use my phone while I’m driving.