Hacker News Reader

Comment by amalcon | Hacker News Reader

sometimes I text or check email while driving, which I know I should not do

I don't mean to pick on you here. You are clearly aware, but it still needs to be said:

Please do not email, text, or even talk on a cell phone while driving. Driving is the most dangerous task that is socially acceptable for nonprofessionals to perform. It is very irresponsible to make such a task any more difficult than it needs to be.

View on HN

Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I think this is a problem that is going to solve itself. And it will do so more quickly and more effectively than legislation ever could.

It's a fortuitous coincidence that the same advances in computing power that have put fantastically distracting little computers in all our hands will also grant automobiles the computational horsepower to start saving us from our own stupidity.

We're probably 5 years away from accident avoidance technologies being a standard feature in new automobiles. Even sooner if auto insurance companies start giving massive discounts for cars that have them. Not only will auto-braking and auto-swerve technologies solve the distracted driver problem. They're going to solve the much larger issue that humans are just generally very poor at prolonged tasks requiring a high degree of concentration.

And from there it's only a few more years before the car pool lanes are repurposed as auto-pilot lanse. Filled with endless virtual trains of cars whizzing along at 95 miles per hour with 2 feet between each vehicle. While human occupants are mindlessly (and safely) scrolling through Facebook...

"Please do not email, text, or even talk on a cell phone while driving."

I knew of a woman whose husband was killed while driving to work. In the opposite lane, on a narrow road, was a young woman who, while driving, was trying to put cream cheese onto her bagel, so she could enjoy eating it while driving. She unknowingly veered across the center line and the 2 cars collided, almost directly head on. The guy was killed. The woman was saved by the airbag in her car.

I agree that driving is dangerous. I agree that doing anything that distracts you, while you are driving, is dangerous to yourself and others around you. But I would not want to elevate texting and cell phones above other activities that drivers do -- eating is also a big risk, dropping food on your lap is distracting, etc.

The risk of emphasizing texting as uniquely dangerous is that drivers will start to underestimate the risks of other dangerous things they do.

I'm fairly confident his point wasn't that cell phones were the most dangerous possible toy while driving. I think he was trying to convey that driving was the most dangerous possible task people regularly undertake, and any distraction during its performance is recklessly dangerous. The phone-based wording was probably just contextual, given the original post.

If someone posts about doing food preparation while driving I'm sure they'll get called out on that, too.

IMO only when this is treated like DUI will it be taken more seriously. It sounds radical, but the activity is easily avoidable, seriously diminishes your focus and can have horrible consequences.

It's already illegal to use a cell phone while driving in Ontario, Canada. Hands-free devices are still okay, however (I disagree with that part).

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/safety/distracted-driving/

I'm guessing the penalties are not anywhere similar, however, which was the parent's point. Out here in California, a DUI generally ends up costing someone ~$10,000 after all is said and done (if I remember correctly). A cell phone ticket is nowhere near that.

For context, Driving while texting is already illegal in 41 of the US States, however, I believe what the parent was saying, is that the penalties need to be higher, like that associated with DUI.

Why do you disagree with hands-free devices? What do you think about conversing with a passenger during driving?

One reason I've heard is that when you're on the phone with someone, they don't know what's going on in the car whereas if you're talking with the person next to you and you suddenly need to focus all of your attention on the road, they can stop talking rather than adding to your distraction. Plus they provide a second set of eyes. I don't know how accurate and reliable that theory is, but it makes sense to me.

I also wonder if the mental effort of listening to a voice coming through on a speaker would make it harder to focus. I tend to have trouble hearing people when I'm talking on the phone; but that might just be me.

It's no more distracting than talk radio or some blaring annoying commercial which doesn't stop talking if I need to focus. When you have a handsfree device, just say "Hold on" and do what you need to do. You can always ask them to repeat themselves I you don't hear.

People usually don't talk back to the radio though. Thinking up a response to your conversational partner is where the distraction occurs.

DUI can be accurately tested with a breathalyzer. How would you expect these stiffer penalties to be enforced? I believe the current laws essentially require the offense to be directly observed by police or for the driver to inadvertently admit to it.

Observation by police officers? I already see plenty of people texting while driving. The first hint is that they're driving like they're not paying attention. When you pull up alongside them you see them glancing down repetitively.

Also, the penalty fines are a joke. I think in CA at least they were very low, especially considering IMO distracted driving is way more dangerous than other simpler measures like speeding.

Too bad impairment can't be accurately tested with a breathalyzer. That's what we are really worried about in all these scenarios after all.

What if your car had a slot into which you were required to insert your phone in order to operate the vehicle.

What do you do when your phone is lost or stolen (or broken)?

Or if you have two.

Thank you for posting this. It is incredibly frustrating to see people justify this behavior with "I know I shouldn't, but". You know the jerk weaving in his lane in the car next to you, staring down at their phone? That's you!

What about listening to the radio, talking to a passenger, or just zoning out and daydreaming?

These can all be just as dangerous as using a phone while driving.

It's not clear those are similarly dangerous behaviors. Talking to passengers can prevent falling asleep at the wheel, which may be a bigger net danger than conversational distraction.

But the larger answer is perhaps that if you are driving poorly you can be ticketed regardless of the underlying reason.

Ideally, people would not drive when they are fatigued enough to fall asleep at the wheel.

I do realize that the reasons for it are often quite complicated, I don't mean to be dismissive. Such levels of fatigue are something society should be taking a closer look at.

New York didn't make texting while driving illegal - it made driving while distracted illegal, so as to encompass all smartphone-related and unrelated issues that make the road dangerous.

I text, call, check email, and web all while driving and I bet at least 95% of people on HN do too.

If you want this to stop then invent a new way to communicate.

Based on the top replies to the top comment, I believe it's way less than 95% and, like, I certainly hope so.

Your request, moreover, seems very difficult to meet. What about the lady who wanted fresh cream cheese on her bagel while driving, and who doing so killed a man? Shouldn't she say, "well, invent a robot who can feed me while I drive"?

I guess Google's self-driving cars will ultimately satisfy all of the above requests.

Preach all you want. Pass all the laws you want. People will do this because they can and they want to. The only real way to mitigate it is through innovation. Not by telling adults on the internet what they can and cannot do or by passing draconian laws telling people when they are allowed to communicate.

Some people "can and want to" steal cars, or commit domestic violence, or dump benzene into rivers. "I want to do this, therefore it should be legal" is not a good argument when there's a compelling argument that it harms society.

True. However, laws will still be passed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com