Hi-tech cars: Driver distraction warning in US
 

Hi-tech cars: Driver distraction warning in US - BBC News

Distracted...???

No...

See... They're concentrating...!!!

http://i536.photobucket.com/albums/f...esCAZR2P7C.jpg

http://i536.photobucket.com/albums/f...6969/Bdwi9.jpg



:rolleyes:


It's bad here, real bad...:(

>

Piwoslaw -

I'm sorry, can you repeat that? ... I'm sorry, can you repeat that? ... I'm sorry .............

CarloSW2

Seems like an exercise in futility. Before we had idiots texting on their iPads behind the wheel, they were reading maps and books. Sure, disable the built-ins, but how on earth will they keep them from operating portable devices?

Piwoslaw -

I think the "output" should be suppressed based on what the user is doing. When we talk to a passenger in the car, the passenger is also aware of the outside surroundings and will react to situations (be quiet or go "eeek"!). When the driver brakes hard, the passenger knows what's going on and will stop talking (good). This *doesn't* happen when someone is on the other end of the phone (bad). The interface can also have access to this information, so why not make it go "eeek!" or follow policy X that the user has defined?

Ha ha, they've got radar in cars, why not have all output suppressed when the car detects that the driver's velocity puts them within the "3 second" rule? :

The 3-Second Following Distance Rule | Driver's Ed Guru
This would force drivers to "make space" around themselves in order to use the gizmos. It could also shut down when the national speed limit is exceeded.

CarloSW2

UFO -

Ultimately yes, the cat is out of the bag and eating the tuna fish.

CarloSW2

Is she videocalling someone?:eek:?:eek:

It's not just about being 3 seconds behind the previous car. What about hitting the car in the next lane, or driving into a tree/pole/ditch? Or even driving slowly through a neighborhood and watching out for children/pedestrians/cyclists?

Piwoslaw -

I don't disagree with you, I am just glomming one partial solution onto a problem that is already out of control. I'll bet some will propose robo-cars to solve this problem.

CarloSW2

Locally, they tried to outlaw texting while driving, but found that drivers were even more dangerous because whereas before they had the phone up high where they could see straight ahead, now they tried to hide it down in their lap.

On the way to the airport the other day we were talking about this very thing and glanced over at the driver next to us was talking to his buddy on a large in dash tv .


Hopeless !

I'm all for this stuff. Bluetooth is a must have for me in my car. Don't have to touch the phone. All phone calls are made by voice dialing and I never have to look away from the road or take my hands off the wheel.

I feel like all cars should be like this.

On a similar note, I wish the control layout of all cars was like Japanese sports cars. Both my S2000 and my 300ZX had control layouts where the driver never had to take their hands off the wheel (except for the radio on the Z). On the S2K the radio is even blocked off from the factory, so I never even look at it.

It's about time for the subject to get some attention. Nazis like MADD and NHTSA and the various Highway Patrols and whatnot have been pushing their ludicrous "zero deaths" B.S. on everyone, resulting in big fat heavy gizmo-laden vehicles- that people perceive as so safe that they now expect the vehicles to be able to drive themselves- when the main problem all along was distracted drivers. Get the toys outta there and maybe 500lbs of safety crap can go away too.

...new and improved high-tech methods to get your name on the annual Darwin Awards Candidates' listing!

I still can't believe all the stuff that came on my 1st Silverwing 1983 model.
AM/FM/Cassette/ CB Incredible! I instantly pulled all of that out due to the weight, plus: who needs that distraction factor?

I want to concentrate on the fun of riding, not cheap little toys!!!

The closest I have come to being killed on a highway in the last 5 years is 3 almost head on collisions on 2 lane roads where the other driver was on some kind of mobile device and swerved over onto my lane, more than 50% of my lane, without any real escape route due to the ditch a foot off my side of the road.

The more techy stuff they do to cars to allow less attention by drivers, the less attention the same drivers will pay to what is going on around them. While you may be able to teach a car to drive itself, I doubt you will teach a car to anticipate potential events and preempt them.

regards
Mech

Good choice of name, then. Are you officially competing for a Darwin Award?

Still haven't figured out why (except for the occasionial 911 call) anyone thinks they need to make a phone call while driving.

I don't see how these so called "smart" devices that will disable electronics in the car can discern if the driver or passengers are texting or using a smart phone.

Three cheers for the nanny state that will make us all safer.

If you object to the nanny state doing it, let me offer a more libertarian solution: You drive down the road yakking on your electronic device, and appear to be on a collision course with me. My automated anti-distracted-driver weapons lock on target...

Its no different than talking to a passenger (depending on the study you reference)... except I can shut them up with the tap of a button :)

ProDarwin -

I would say yes and no to that because the passenger is getting at least *some* feedback from the environment such that they can shut up on their own. But yes, some passengers are worse than others.

CarloSW2

Yes, which is why I said it depends on the study. There have been some that show a blindfolded passenger (no visual cues to shut up) is no worse than a normal one. Really though, I don't care. Talking, via bluetooth, during my commute is the least of my safety related worries.

Much of this forum has astoundingly hypocritical views regarding safety...

No driver distractions! But I'm installing a scan gauge and other instrumentation
Big vehicles are evil and handle poorly! But I'm inflating my not-at-all-sticky LRR tires to 50psi to further reduce traction.


Etc.

The technology is inevitable. This will just encourage car makers to make self driving cars even sooner.

...just "hope & pray" they do NOT use Microsoft operating system -- imagine suddenly encountering a "blue-screen-of-death" at 60 or 75 MPH while hurtling down a crowded highway, at night!

Hmm...would changes like these influence the use of the ScanGauge?

For those who have not seen this UK ad on "texting while driving".

**Warning graphic content**

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0LCmStIw9E

England doesn't pull any "punches" in their Driver's Ed PSA's do they!

Maybe not on a motorcycle.

regards
Mech

Yes we trust those computers to do it all right because nothing can ever.......

go wrong......go wrong.......go wrong!!!

You'd be surprised...

Hello -

Well, now, this is relevant :

Let the Robot Drive: The Autonomous Car of the Future Is Here | Wired Magazine | Wired.com
CarloSW2

I think it's creepy. I like to drive... occasionally.

I could write a fairly decent sized book on driving techniques that will probably never be programmable into a self driven car.

regards
Mech

...I don't like my Government intervening in MY life, so having it deciding *for me* what route and how fast to drive down to the local McDonald's for a burger is NOT GONNA happen for me.

...I know how to "think" for myself, in spite of what BIG Brother thinks is best for me.

Sorry, but it already has. Forget about speed limits and stop signs: who do you think decided where to put the roads?

...ah, but I still have the "option" to decide-for-myself *which* route and road to take...at least for now.

...most roads are initially "guided/directed" by property-rights and ownerships, inspite of "Eminent Domain" land grabs.

Frank -

Speaking from a programming POV I don't want it either. Also, anything that is solid state electronic has an "instant failure scenario". For instance, My Dad was telling me that mechanical systems typically fail "gracefully", so you can be warned when something is breaking down. Electronic systems can fail without warning.

What this implies to me is that you need massive(?) redundancy to make it safe. That in turn drives the cost up in a mass production environment that is trying to drive the cost down (conflict of interest). Finally, the ultimate redundancy is ... the mechanical system the car comes with today.

CarloSW2

...tell me about, I'm a retired EE who's wearing a pacemaker!!!

Old Tele man -

Boy oh boy, if I had your skillzz then I'd be working on an external gizmo that detects the health of the pacemaker, but does not *interfere* with the pacemaker in the process. Oh wait, it already exists.

CarloSW2

...and, my cardiologist wonders *why* I track and graph total battery voltage, current, and projected battery "life" everytime I see him (wink,wink)?!?! -- something about "self-preservation" comes to mind.