7 ms·

Certainly a terrible idea on every level, but I can't help but sympathize with the intent. Too much of the public simply aren't responsible about driving and t

Certainly a terrible idea on every level, but I can't help but sympathize with the intent. Too much of the public simply aren't responsible about driving and there doesn't seem to be any good way to identify and prevent or penalize them for it.

cleaver 12y ago
As a motorcyclist, I can sympathize... I become acutely aware of distracted drivers when I'm in traffic on two wheels. Like you say, it's a terrible idea for a lot of reasons, but I always admire a good hack.
Nogwater 12y ago
Since hands-free phone usage is just as distracting[1], it would be very challenging for a police offer know if someone is using a cell phone while driving. Probably we just need a cultural shift to make people reluctant to use a phone (or even talk to their passenger) while driving. My guess is that we'll get self-driving cars first. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety#Handsfree_device http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safet... Edit: https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/default/files/MeasuringCognitiveDistractionFS.pdf https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/default/files/MeasuringC... Don't talk to passengers folks! (like that's going to happen)
- sukuriant 12y ago
  I need to read those studies closely; but, I imagine there's a difference between gabbing about nothing and doing serious mental work when it comes to the amount of focus taken away by talking. Singing with the radio probably has similar focus requirements to gabbing. I have not done any tests on this; and we're not going to stop singing on the radio. Fiddling with a phone is probably the most dangerous of phone related activities while driving, though. Looking and reading off the screen (texts), pushing capacitive spots on the screen to interact with it (changing songs), and so on. Police most likely want eyes on the road, as even passive attention to the road is better than eyes completely off it. [edit: replaced "be singing" with "stop singing" since that's what I meant to say]
  - JohnTHaller 12y ago
    I know there was a study and analysis a few years back that found the reason people are more distracted having a hands-free conversation in the car vs a conversation with someone next to them is that the person on the other end of a phone call doesn't have awareness to your situation. So, while someone talking with you while sitting next to you in the car will naturally quite down while a change in driving conditions happens (or even alert you), the person on the phone is unaware of it and demands more of your attention. I can't recall when or where I saw the study, unfortunately.
    - Wistar 12y ago
      Maybe from the same study... IN addition to citing the advantages of conversing with a situation-aware passenger vs an unaware phone-caller, the study summary also made much of their finding that there is a significant cognitive load devoted to visualizing the person at the other end of a phone call. This visualization is not needed when the person is in the car. It also mentioned that young children can cause dangerous distractions because they lack the knowledge to know when the driving has gotten tough.
    - sukuriant 12y ago
      That would make sense, too. In my own driving experience, most of the people that ride with me in the car in the front seat are of the mind "We're looking at the road", not "the driver is looking at the road, so I don't have to" as their general attitude; and when I've been under the weather, driving poorly, they've been the first to comment and require a fix to it. As for the phone, they're also the hands that will affect my phone if we need to change settings on GPS or music or whatever, because they understand the safety precautions. So, what you say makes sense at least anecdotally and mentally.
      - vacri 12y ago
        On a tangent, there seems to be an interesting difference in front-seat passengers who drive and those who don't. Often you'll see the drivers do a head-check with you as you approach an intersection. I have a few friends that don't drive, and I've never noticed any of them doing that subconscious check.
john_b 12y ago
Until self-driving cars or a viable nationwide public transportation system comes along, a well-funded and sustained marketing campaign along the lines of "don't drink and drive" could help reduce fatalities (see [1] for the historical trend). Many people think they are the exception to the rule and can safely drive while texting or whatever. If, during the process of getting a license, drivers were forced to operate a driving simulator while texting it may cause them to realize how bad everyone is at this. [1] http://responsibility.org/sites/default/files/files/AIDF%20Rates%20-%201991-2012%20trend.gif http://responsibility.org/sites/default/files/files/AIDF%20R...
Bluestrike2 12y ago
I can't. There are accidents where even seconds matter and the effects of the jamming can mean the difference between life and death or even simply a shift in the a victim's odds. Or consider emergency services whose radios were affected: maybe paramedics were radioing in status updates to a hospital, or perhaps police officers were in the middle of receiving an Amber alert. Or, imagine that he's injured in an accident himself. He, and anyone else potentially injured in such an accident, are potentially at risk because people can't notify 911. If he's lucky, he's able to turn it off. If he's unlucky, and is incapacitated or otherwise unable to turn it off, well, that's quite the problem now, isn't it? I hate dreaming up hypotheticals, but this story practically demands it. His actions were no less selfish than someone else's texting while driving.
- Jtsummers 12y ago
  A friend of mine used to rant about cellphones in theaters, and thought theaters should install jammers (as in, he was actually surprised that none had done this yet). The fact is, they're a primary communication device for many people. Who knows when you might receive a call that you have to take (for certain jobs or with situations concerning family or friends), or when you need to make a phone call (see the Aurora shooting or the recent one in FL for violent examples, but even a heart attack or some other medical emergency). Jammers just aren't a good idea for 99.999% of the situations people suggest using them.
  - vacri 12y ago
    If it's known that the theatre is a phone dead zone, you can step outside the theatre and make the call. If someone's having a heart attack, you have a whole theatre full of people that you can pull resources from. A car driving around is a secret dead zone that punishes you for being nearby, even if you're not transgressing any social norms or traffic laws. Sitting on a park bench nearby? Hell, even being a passenger in a vehicle? That's the problem - he's being an indiscriminate vigilante.
    - stevekinney 12y ago
thrownaway2424 12y ago
It's actually a trivial matter of image processing to detect, by classification, photos depicting a driver looking down at their hands or holding their hand to their face. It is also completely trivial to OCR license plates. It would be a quite simple system to classify such pictures, send them to human review for verification, and then mail out tickets.
anonymousDan 12y ago
Until we have self-driving cars at least.

cleaver 12y ago

As a motorcyclist, I can sympathize... I become acutely aware of distracted drivers when I'm in traffic on two wheels. Like you say, it's a terrible idea for a lot of reasons, but I always admire a good hack.

Nogwater 12y ago

Since hands-free phone usage is just as distracting[1], it would be very challenging for a police offer know if someone is using a cell phone while driving. Probably we just need a cultural shift to make people reluctant to use a phone (or even talk to their passenger) while driving. My guess is that we'll get self-driving cars first. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety#Handsfree_device http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safet... Edit: https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/default/files/MeasuringCognitiveDistractionFS.pdf https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/default/files/MeasuringC... Don't talk to passengers folks! (like that's going to happen)

sukuriant 12y ago
I need to read those studies closely; but, I imagine there's a difference between gabbing about nothing and doing serious mental work when it comes to the amount of focus taken away by talking. Singing with the radio probably has similar focus requirements to gabbing. I have not done any tests on this; and we're not going to stop singing on the radio. Fiddling with a phone is probably the most dangerous of phone related activities while driving, though. Looking and reading off the screen (texts), pushing capacitive spots on the screen to interact with it (changing songs), and so on. Police most likely want eyes on the road, as even passive attention to the road is better than eyes completely off it. [edit: replaced "be singing" with "stop singing" since that's what I meant to say]
- JohnTHaller 12y ago
  I know there was a study and analysis a few years back that found the reason people are more distracted having a hands-free conversation in the car vs a conversation with someone next to them is that the person on the other end of a phone call doesn't have awareness to your situation. So, while someone talking with you while sitting next to you in the car will naturally quite down while a change in driving conditions happens (or even alert you), the person on the phone is unaware of it and demands more of your attention. I can't recall when or where I saw the study, unfortunately.
  - Wistar 12y ago
    Maybe from the same study... IN addition to citing the advantages of conversing with a situation-aware passenger vs an unaware phone-caller, the study summary also made much of their finding that there is a significant cognitive load devoted to visualizing the person at the other end of a phone call. This visualization is not needed when the person is in the car. It also mentioned that young children can cause dangerous distractions because they lack the knowledge to know when the driving has gotten tough.
  - sukuriant 12y ago
    That would make sense, too. In my own driving experience, most of the people that ride with me in the car in the front seat are of the mind "We're looking at the road", not "the driver is looking at the road, so I don't have to" as their general attitude; and when I've been under the weather, driving poorly, they've been the first to comment and require a fix to it. As for the phone, they're also the hands that will affect my phone if we need to change settings on GPS or music or whatever, because they understand the safety precautions. So, what you say makes sense at least anecdotally and mentally.
    - vacri 12y ago
      On a tangent, there seems to be an interesting difference in front-seat passengers who drive and those who don't. Often you'll see the drivers do a head-check with you as you approach an intersection. I have a few friends that don't drive, and I've never noticed any of them doing that subconscious check.

john_b 12y ago

Until self-driving cars or a viable nationwide public transportation system comes along, a well-funded and sustained marketing campaign along the lines of "don't drink and drive" could help reduce fatalities (see [1] for the historical trend). Many people think they are the exception to the rule and can safely drive while texting or whatever. If, during the process of getting a license, drivers were forced to operate a driving simulator while texting it may cause them to realize how bad everyone is at this. [1] http://responsibility.org/sites/default/files/files/AIDF%20Rates%20-%201991-2012%20trend.gif http://responsibility.org/sites/default/files/files/AIDF%20R...

Bluestrike2 12y ago

I can't. There are accidents where even seconds matter and the effects of the jamming can mean the difference between life and death or even simply a shift in the a victim's odds. Or consider emergency services whose radios were affected: maybe paramedics were radioing in status updates to a hospital, or perhaps police officers were in the middle of receiving an Amber alert. Or, imagine that he's injured in an accident himself. He, and anyone else potentially injured in such an accident, are potentially at risk because people can't notify 911. If he's lucky, he's able to turn it off. If he's unlucky, and is incapacitated or otherwise unable to turn it off, well, that's quite the problem now, isn't it? I hate dreaming up hypotheticals, but this story practically demands it. His actions were no less selfish than someone else's texting while driving.

Jtsummers 12y ago
A friend of mine used to rant about cellphones in theaters, and thought theaters should install jammers (as in, he was actually surprised that none had done this yet). The fact is, they're a primary communication device for many people. Who knows when you might receive a call that you have to take (for certain jobs or with situations concerning family or friends), or when you need to make a phone call (see the Aurora shooting or the recent one in FL for violent examples, but even a heart attack or some other medical emergency). Jammers just aren't a good idea for 99.999% of the situations people suggest using them.
- vacri 12y ago
  If it's known that the theatre is a phone dead zone, you can step outside the theatre and make the call. If someone's having a heart attack, you have a whole theatre full of people that you can pull resources from. A car driving around is a secret dead zone that punishes you for being nearby, even if you're not transgressing any social norms or traffic laws. Sitting on a park bench nearby? Hell, even being a passenger in a vehicle? That's the problem - he's being an indiscriminate vigilante.
  - stevekinney 12y ago

thrownaway2424 12y ago

It's actually a trivial matter of image processing to detect, by classification, photos depicting a driver looking down at their hands or holding their hand to their face. It is also completely trivial to OCR license plates. It would be a quite simple system to classify such pictures, send them to human review for verification, and then mail out tickets.

anonymousDan 12y ago

Until we have self-driving cars at least.