No One’s Will Stop Using Phones in the Car. Make It Safer

[redheadbaker]

Considering the real danger in using your car in the phone is that they take your MIND off your driving (studies show that hands-free devices aren't any safer than holding the phone with your hand), there isn't anything they can do to make using a phone in car safer.

[iammalcolmx]

I love how Bluetooth reads text messages. I send H sexual texts when I knows hes in the car JUST so he has to heard them being read, LOL!!!

[quickstepstar]

So if the issue is taking the mind off of driving, how if having a phone call any better than say listening to audio books? or having a conversation with the person sitting next to you?

I think making phones/cars hands free is a great idea. So many times i would be waiting next to a car at red light and when it switches to green, the driver is still fiddling on his/her phone, so I hear people honk and stuff.

[omgzombies]

This is how it will eventually be made safer.

www.marketwatch.com/story/autopilot-googles-self-driving-car-is-arriving-soon-2014-04-30

You will be able to call and text all you want.

[blink]

I want to like this, but I don't think I can. The suggestion of firmware updates to cars seems unsettling, possibly unsafe, and I think could encourage bad practices down the road with automakers. I also don't like how this is basically an encouragement of bad behavior. I just don’t see more tech being the solution to personal responsibility and you know not making a conscious decision to negligently kill someone. Though I also don't like all of the technology in cars now the way it is.

[pamela]

Jul 31, 2014 8:12:43 GMT -5 @evelynrichards said:

Jul 31, 2014 8:10:11 GMT -5 quickstepstar said:

So if the issue is taking the mind off of driving, how if having a phone call any better than say listening to audio books? or having a conversation with the person sitting next to you?

I think making phones/cars hands free is a great idea. So many times i would be waiting next to a car at red light and when it switches to green, the driver is still fiddling on his/her phone, so I hear people honk and stuff.

Hands-free texting requires more concentration:  

www.cbsnews.com/news/even-hands-free-texting-while-driving-is-dangerous-study-finds/

Probably because it's so cumbersome and error prone. But just having a phone conversation or listening to navigation isn't any harder than if the person is in the car (in which case you might even turn to look at them during the conversation) talking to you or giving directions.

And why are built in nav systems to antiquated?

[carowen]

Jul 31, 2014 8:00:54 GMT -5 redheadbaker said:

Considering the real danger in using your car in the phone is that they take your MIND off your driving (studies show that hands-free devices aren't any safer than holding the phone with your hand), there isn't anything they can do to make using a phone in car safer.

There are a ton of things that distract drivers - conversations, kids screaming/asking for crap, music/radio, etc. But looking at ones phone instead of the road is a huge problem. If there is a way to get people's eyes back on the road and off their screens, then it's safer.  Of course it's not as safe as driving without all those other things, but at least the person isn't reading a screen.

I think saying there's no zero risk option is being shortsighted when there are ways to improve the situation even if it doesn't eliminate the problems altogether.

[debatethis]

Jul 31, 2014 8:03:30 GMT -5 @evelynrichards said:

Jul 31, 2014 8:00:54 GMT -5 redheadbaker said:

Considering the real danger in using your car in the phone is that they take your MIND off your driving (studies show that hands-free devices aren't any safer than holding the phone with your hand), there isn't anything they can do to make using a phone in car safer.

I agree. But it's not going to stop.

I disagree. The NHTSA and various other federal safety organizations need to get on board with banning all cell phone use and incentivize states to comply by tying it to road construction dollars like they did with increasing the federal drinking age to 21 in the 80's. Add in a massive ad campaign about the dangers of using phones in any capacity and it WILL stop, or at least drastically decrease.

ETA: 22 pages of "light reading" for anyone who is interested www.nsc.org/safety_road/Distracted_Driving/Documents/Dstrct_Drvng_White_Paper_1_2011.pdf

[pescalita]

Jul 31, 2014 8:18:40 GMT -5 blink said:

I want to like this, but I don't think I can. The suggestion of firmware updates to cars seems unsettling, possibly unsafe, and I think could encourage bad practices down the road with automakers. I also don't like how this is basically an encouragement of bad behavior. I just don’t see more tech being the solution to personal responsibility and you know not making a conscious decision to negligently kill someone. Though I also don't like all of the technology in cars now the way it is.

I think I've been working in Silicon Valley too long because there is nothing about this I agree with.

Personal responsibility is a nice solution in theory, but nearly impossible to affect and always prone to error.

[pixy0stix]

I'm going to beat heads. God bless those of you who are once again proving the time worn arguments wrong.

[2curlydogs]

All I'm going to add is the first thing the cops did in my sister's car wreck yesterday was confiscate the cell phones. It has been termed "an ongoing investigation".

So.

[origami]

Jul 31, 2014 8:16:54 GMT -5 omgzombies said:

This is how it will eventually be made safer.

www.marketwatch.com/story/autopilot-googles-self-driving-car-is-arriving-soon-2014-04-30

You will be able to call and text all you want.

I was just going to post this! Let's quit driving instead of texting

[pamela]

Jul 31, 2014 8:55:57 GMT -5 @evelynrichards said:

Jul 31, 2014 8:18:43 GMT -5 pamela said:

Probably because it's so cumbersome and error prone. But just having a phone conversation or listening to navigation isn't any harder than if the person is in the car (in which case you might even turn to look at them during the conversation) talking to you or giving directions.

And why are built in nav systems to antiquated?

Because most of them are using very old map systems. To update them, you have to connect them to a computer, which almost no one does. (And you can only do this if it's a removable system, which the very old ones are not.) The old ones also lack such features as spoken street names and lane guidance.

Also, nav apps are free. And everyone has a smartphone, so they're using those.  

It's not even just the maps being outdated (mine can be updated with a USB stick, if they ever actually put out map updates). But the interface design is just so awful and unpleasant to look at. And it's better than my mom's toyota one.

[pamela]

Jul 31, 2014 8:54:04 GMT -5 @evelynrichards said:

FWIW, I don't think people should use phones in their cars. You don't need to update Facebook while you're driving, whether you're doing it with your fingers or hands-free.

But I think the horse has left the barn.

Facebooking and other social media use actually is illegal while driving here. But not all cell phone use while driving is that. Some of it is actual talking on the phone, you know, what phones actually were originally designed for.

[origami]

Jul 31, 2014 8:59:59 GMT -5 pamela said:

Jul 31, 2014 8:55:57 GMT -5 @evelynrichards said:

Because most of them are using very old map systems. To update them, you have to connect them to a computer, which almost no one does. (And you can only do this if it's a removable system, which the very old ones are not.) The old ones also lack such features as spoken street names and lane guidance.

Also, nav apps are free. And everyone has a smartphone, so they're using those.  

It's not even just the maps being outdated (mine can be updated with a USB stick, if they ever actually put out map updates). But the interface design is just so awful and unpleasant to look at. And it's better than my mom's toyota one.

My DH says to look at a bunch of auto engineers and you'll know why they can't design hip interfaces (it's a pleated pants factory) lol. I actually think it's because the design process takes so long it's outdated by the time cars are actually built and sold, but I'm just guessing because I don't know that process specifically.

[blink]

Jul 31, 2014 8:38:03 GMT -5 pescalita said:

Jul 31, 2014 8:18:40 GMT -5 blink said:

I want to like this, but I don't think I can. The suggestion of firmware updates to cars seems unsettling, possibly unsafe, and I think could encourage bad practices down the road with automakers. I also don't like how this is basically an encouragement of bad behavior. I just don’t see more tech being the solution to personal responsibility and you know not making a conscious decision to negligently kill someone. Though I also don't like all of the technology in cars now the way it is.

I think I've been working in Silicon Valley too long because there is nothing about this I agree with.

Personal responsibility is a nice solution in theory, but nearly impossible to affect and always prone to error.

I know personal responsibility isn't perfect but that doesn't mean I have to love the alternative. And I hate how cellphones get a pass, because of entertainment and money.

I also don't like this author's suggested alternatives. Connecting your phone to a larger screen that will cost more money to replace if something goes out, requiring a car to have internet access for firmware updates. Personally, I would hate for my car to get a "red ring of death." The only one that I liked was the USB dock that would place the phone outside of someone's reach. I think there is something to be said of limiting features or disabling features in a moving car for the driver's phone and I would much rather see that than the former alternatives.

[wawa]

So...do the people who are all "just stop using your phones!!!" not use nav apps?

I'm on board with not texting. I'm reading the nsc white paper now to understand why Bluetooth enabled conversations are still bad. I'm open to understanding. But I didn't keep up with the last thread on this topic so I'm not sure where the line has been drawn.

Or are we already worn out in this one?

[pixy0stix]

Jul 31, 2014 9:11:00 GMT -5 wawa said:

So...do the people who are all "just stop using your phones!!!" not use nav apps?

I'm on board with not texting. I'm reading the nsc white paper now to understand why Bluetooth enabled conversations are still bad. I'm open to understanding. But I didn't keep up with the last thread on this topic so I'm not sure where the line has been drawn.

Or are we already worn out in this one?

I'm already worn out. I use a nav ap, but I set it before I start my car and if I have to make changes I'll have DH do it or pull over.

[niemand88f]

Jul 31, 2014 8:18:43 GMT -5 pamela said:

Jul 31, 2014 8:12:43 GMT -5 @evelynrichards said:

Hands-free texting requires more concentration:  

www.cbsnews.com/news/even-hands-free-texting-while-driving-is-dangerous-study-finds/

Probably because it's so cumbersome and error prone. But just having a phone conversation or listening to navigation isn't any harder than if the person is in the car (in which case you might even turn to look at them during the conversation) talking to you or giving directions.

And why are built in nav systems to antiquated?

Well, it still is harder.... An adult passenger will generally naturally stop talking if a tricky situation arises, because they're in the car too and can see that everyone ahead is slamming on their brakes or an exit is coming up requiring several lane changes. The person on the phone or the navigation system will just keep talking through all that.

[pixy0stix]

So here is my, "If pixy ran the world" solution. All newer cars would be fit with technology that would lock phones while the car is in motion. Obviously people think they know better than science (gee, whoda thunk that?), so it's time to take away their toys. Go full on nanny state.

Mainly I'm just tired that people are STILL using the, "It's not any different than having a convo with someone in the car," when clearly all the bodies of research say it is. Just because you think something doesn't make it true.

[pamela]

Jul 31, 2014 9:16:36 GMT -5 niemand88f said:

Jul 31, 2014 8:18:43 GMT -5 pamela said:

Probably because it's so cumbersome and error prone. But just having a phone conversation or listening to navigation isn't any harder than if the person is in the car (in which case you might even turn to look at them during the conversation) talking to you or giving directions.

And why are built in nav systems to antiquated?

Well, it still is harder.... An adult passenger will generally naturally stop talking if a tricky situation arises, because they're in the car too and can see that everyone ahead is slamming on their brakes or an exit is coming up requiring several lane changes. The person on the phone or the navigation system will just keep talking through all that.

Well my child passenger won't, so am I going to ban him to? Someone please come up with something that will make him be quiet when I need to concentrate while driving through a storm. Actually, my husband isn't good about it either, he's seriously oblivious if he's not the driver.

[sushi]

Jul 31, 2014 9:05:36 GMT -5 origami said:

Jul 31, 2014 8:59:59 GMT -5 pamela said:

It's not even just the maps being outdated (mine can be updated with a USB stick, if they ever actually put out map updates). But the interface design is just so awful and unpleasant to look at. And it's better than my mom's toyota one.

My DH says to look at a bunch of auto engineers and you'll know why they can't design hip interfaces (it's a pleated pants factory) lol. I actually think it's because the design process takes so long it's outdated by the time cars are actually built and sold, but I'm just guessing because I don't know that process specifically.

That's what I've read. Consumer tech comes on the market faster than cars. Tech features are already bordering on obsolete by the time the car hits the lot.

[rugbywife]

I think the only way it is going to get better is when people start either going to jail or losing their life savings after killing someone because of it. It hurts me to think that it will take more deaths in order to make it change but it likely will. Then again, people still drink and drive, so who knows.

I think the reality is that a lot of people (probably myself included) think we are a lot better at driving distracted than we truly are.

[pixy0stix]

Jul 31, 2014 9:25:07 GMT -5 pamela said:

Jul 31, 2014 9:16:36 GMT -5 niemand88f said:

Well, it still is harder.... An adult passenger will generally naturally stop talking if a tricky situation arises, because they're in the car too and can see that everyone ahead is slamming on their brakes or an exit is coming up requiring several lane changes. The person on the phone or the navigation system will just keep talking through all that.

Well my child passenger won't, so am I going to ban him to? Someone please come up with something that will make him be quiet when I need to concentrate while driving through a storm. Actually, my husband isn't good about it either, he's seriously oblivious if he's not the driver.

Pamela, before you go further. Please provide the research to back up your assertions. I'll wait.

[pamela]

Jul 31, 2014 9:22:09 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

So here is my, "If pixy ran the world" solution. All newer cars would be fit with technology that would lock phones while the car is in motion. Obviously people think they know better than science (gee, whoda thunk that?), so it's time to take away their toys. Go full on nanny state.

Mainly I'm just tired that people are STILL using the, "It's not any different than having a convo with someone in the car," when clearly all the bodies of research say it is. Just because you think something doesn't make it true.

So my passenger can't make calls or use their phone either?

[pixy0stix]

Jul 31, 2014 9:47:51 GMT -5 pamela said:

Jul 31, 2014 9:22:09 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

So here is my, "If pixy ran the world" solution. All newer cars would be fit with technology that would lock phones while the car is in motion. Obviously people think they know better than science (gee, whoda thunk that?), so it's time to take away their toys. Go full on nanny state.

Mainly I'm just tired that people are STILL using the, "It's not any different than having a convo with someone in the car," when clearly all the bodies of research say it is. Just because you think something doesn't make it true.

So my passenger can't make calls or use their phone either?

Nope.

Please go find the sources I asked for.

[Wanderista]

I think it should be ok to use a phone briefly when you are waiting at a red light or stuck in extremely congested (not moving) traffic. I live in a very congested area and I will use those moments to adjust the map if needed or to send a quick, "I'm on my way," text. Other than that, no, I don't use a phone and I hate when people use them and then drive stupidly. 

I agree that enforcement needs to be tougher. I am sure that it is easier for a cop to clock and prosecute a speeder than it is for them to prove that bad driving was caused by a phone. In other words, it's harder for them to spot the cellphone and then pull that driver over than it is for them to catch a speeder. I think that if you are weaving all over your lane unpredictably whether it's due to drinking or cellphones or extreme old age, a cop should have the right to stop you. Again, I'm sure they do but when they are looking at a bunch of bad drivers, they probably tend to pick the speeder. Easier ticket to give.

[pixy0stix]

Jul 31, 2014 10:00:58 GMT -5 Wanderista said:

I think it should be ok to use a phone briefly when you are waiting at a red light or stuck in extremely congested (not moving) traffic. I live in a very congested area and I will use those moments to adjust the map if needed or to send a quick, "I'm on my way," text. Other than that, no, I don't use a phone and I hate when people use them and then drive stupidly. 

Nope. It's still be proven as a distraction even when stopped at red lights. Your opinion is invalid. Unless you have research to back up your assertion.

[mominatrix]

I'm in Pixy's boat.



We have NFC tags in our cars. That means that all we have to do is hold the phone up to a sticker and it'll do the thing the sticker is programmed to have the phone do. You program the sticker (it can do multiple things) using your phone before sticking it on the dash.

So, H has one in his car that sends me an "I'm on my way" text. He uses it mostly when leaving work for home so I know the sitch.

I have one in my car that sets the phone to 'car mode' (turn on bluetooth, change screen brightness and timeout), and another that sets GPS to navigate me home (I'm often in weird locations I've never been to before, so it's nice). I have another that places a call to H. 


I find the less I'm 'working' with my phone (setting up settings for the car, etc) the less I'm tempted to 'play' on my phone (facebook, etc).

[pixy0stix]

Jul 31, 2014 10:18:04 GMT -5 @bunnybean said:

This study, which of course has the flaw of not distinguishing between hands free and regular use, says talking on the phone isn't as dangerous as the other activities.

www.nydailynews.com/autos/car-crash-risks-aplified-dialing-texting-reaching-cell-phone-article-1.1564313

They also didn't measure brain function during the call. Rather the study backed up the previous ones. Looking at the whole picture, the study still says that driving with a phone is distracting.