Comment by montroser
3 days ago
We now need an ignition interlock device for these people -- that will shut down the car if there's a phone inside that's not in airplane mode. Like they have for DUI doofuses.
3 days ago
We now need an ignition interlock device for these people -- that will shut down the car if there's a phone inside that's not in airplane mode. Like they have for DUI doofuses.
Crimes committed on or for social media (whether for likes or just by negligence, ie, distracted by your app while driving) should automatically get an additional sentence. Same idea as hate crimes, just for social media.
>Crimes committed on or for social media (whether for likes or just by negligence, ie, distracted by your app while driving) should automatically get an additional sentence.
Sounds like something that could be easily abused for cracking down on filming police or similar. Filming ICE agents arresting someone and posting on tiktok? "obstruction of justice", plus they're obviously doing it "for social media". Same for whistleblowers or security researchers.
That doesn't actually work. The problem is people think they're not going to hit anyone and then it doesn't matter what the penalty is because they're discounting the risk of it happening to begin with. Nobody would be doing it who expected to receive the existing penalty for negligent homicide.
You don't need to convince them that the penalty is high, you need to convince them that the risk is high.
Which is why you have to “excessively” punish the behavior you want to stop - not killing people while filming while driving, but simply filming while driving.
1 reply →
Yeah, because it's just extra stupid and tragic. If kids are involved then the extra sentence should quadruple.
Clout enhancement clause
There are also other passengers who could use it without problem.
So no. We simply need to take away the driving licence of such people.
Car still starts without a license is the problem, and these people do not care.
Put them in prison then. Don't make cars worse for everyone else
We've been able to track eye movement across a computer screen for a good 5 years to be able to see what their gaze is set to, providing heatmaps and dwell metrics.
Someone just needs to put that in a car. We've also got lidar based cruise control systems to maintain distance as well as panic brake systems that can react to something in front of the vehicle faster than a human, which is partially there to account for people texting and driving while flying up on a red light with stopped traffic.
We have all the tech needed to make it damn near impossible for a 2 ton mass of steal to just unflinchingly mow someone down, yet we live in a world where it's cheaper to not make those things standard, even knowing without it, more people will die than with it.
This would never be implemented I realize but here is a possible solution:
New law: driver's phone must be in semi-disabled mode
The phone can already infer it is inside moving vehicle. The bigger challenge is, how to determine the phone belongs to the driver?
Say N passengers in car (including driver), each with cell phone.
When phone infers moving vehicle, it attempts to mesh with other phones in the vehicle.
If N=1, driver is solo, phone semi-disables
If N>1, phones ask users to vote on who is the driver.
Result: 1 phone disabled (Voting tie disables both/all)
The only inconvenience here is to a passenger with a phone-less driver.
That's not realistic due to GPS and music.
Maybe a warning with a eye tracker or something...
Listen to the radio and use a map? Driving is a privilege, not a right. Or just don't run people over while livestreaming and you can keep your Apple Maps and Spotify.
Using a paper map while driving can be way more distracting than a GPS. We really don't want to push people back to doing that.
Your last two sentences point in the correct direction: we can't micro-target every behavior that might possibly become a dangerous distraction, because that's just about everything. Driving safely depends on self-regulation, and people incapable of self-regulating (to a minimum standard) shouldn't be granted the privilege of a license.
2 replies →
In ye olde days, drivers wrestling with maps were also criticized as being distracted and dangerous. Having been a driver in ye olde days in situations where a map was needed, I can confidently say that GPS initiated while stopped and used throughout a trip is far safer than the driver using a paper map while driving.
The world won't collectively decide to ban phone gps and bluetooth music, hence "it's not realistic".
Some cars actually have this, and will track where your eyes are to determine if you're distracted and flash a big warning on the dashboard and make a loud noise.
Mostly the ones I drove were able to tell if I was distracted by checking my instruments or mirrors, or over my shoulder before changing lanes.
I came very close to just abandoning the fucking thing in a car park, and getting a train instead.