Lawmakers Seek To Ban Google Glass On The Road

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
It looks like lawmakers are trying to ban Google Glass from being worn while driving. Personally, I would have waited until they actually came out before I wasted time and money on a bill trying to ban them. :rolleyes:

I actually like the idea of the product and I believe it is the future, but last legislature we worked long and hard on a no-texting-and-driving law. It is mostly the young that are the tech-savvy that try new things. They are also our most vulnerable and underskilled drivers. We heard of many crashes caused by texting and driving, most involving our youngest drivers. I see the Google Glass as an extension.
Click to expand...
 
let me get this straight... they're going to ban an inherently hands-free device in order to prevent manual texting while driving?
 
Steve said:
Personally, I would have waited until they actually came out before I wasted time and money on a bill trying to ban them. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Online hunting (where you control a remote gun over the internet) is banned even though it has existed at the time. It's probably easier to do now than later. :D
 
While it's a good idea on paper since it does present another potential distraction, I don't see how it'll get enforced. At best, it'd just be something to stick on a fine or use in an involuntary manslaughter trial after the Google Glass owner crashes into another car or runs over a boy scout troop crossing at an intersection.
 
It's still a major issue if it distracts you. That is the problem with texting/driving, being distracted.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
While it's a good idea on paper since it does present another potential distraction, I don't see how it'll get enforced. At best, it'd just be something to stick on a fine or use in an involuntary manslaughter trial after the Google Glass owner crashes into another car or runs over a boy scout troop crossing at an intersection.
Click to expand...

Meh, the scouts should have been prepared. :cool:
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
While it's a good idea on paper since it does present another potential distraction, I don't see how it'll get enforced. At best, it'd just be something to stick on a fine or use in an involuntary manslaughter trial after the Google Glass owner crashes into another car or runs over a boy scout troop crossing at an intersection.
Click to expand...

Depends on how many points they're worth :)
 
They are going to ban it because you will have a screen in your field of view that could possibly block your ability to see anything
 
dudejoe4 said:
They are going to ban it because you will have a screen in your field of view that could possibly block your ability to see anything
Click to expand...

Exactly. Heaven forbid a government act in a preventative manner instead of reactive. However in general I prefer laws that are more generic "no distracted driving" like texting, putting on makeup or eating a fucking salad while driving. (I just saw this the other day and had to WTF).
 
See I immediately started thinking this solves the GPS need and the HUD for automobiles. You get projected road conditions mapping, etc... all hands free. I see it as a good thing. Isn't it stupid to make laws for problems that don't yet exist? Look how much good the banning texting while driving did; in my state people still do it all the time. The law didn't do crap. I
 
A local radio station was talking about newly increased fines for texting while driving and brought up a VERY good point, which covers this Google Glass issue as well:

We already have laws to tackle this.

It's generally called careless or reckless driving. Regardless of the cause of the bad driving, you can be pulled over for either of these, depending on the severity. We don't need additional laws to cover texting, talking, or Google-glassing (soon to be called "glassing", I'm sure). Just cite them for what the actual danger was: unsafe driving.
 
JBags said:
let me get this straight... they're going to ban an inherently hands-free device in order to prevent manual texting while driving?
Click to expand...
Remember: Most of Congress members that are voted by the oh-so-intelligent US voting population are not exactly the most logical, intelligent, compassionate, or empathetic group of people representing us.

Hands-free texting should not cause any issues on the road. Unless, you're the kind of person that can't keep their eyes on the road and pay attention.
 
dudejoe4 said:
They are going to ban it because you will have a screen in your field of view that could possibly block your ability to see anything
Click to expand...
No, they're 'banning' it so they can issue citations for its use. Citations mean revenue.
 
Skirge01 said:
A local radio station was talking about newly increased fines for texting while driving and brought up a VERY good point, which covers this Google Glass issue as well:

We already have laws to tackle this.

It's generally called careless or reckless driving. Regardless of the cause of the bad driving, you can be pulled over for either of these, depending on the severity. We don't need additional laws to cover texting, talking, or Google-glassing (soon to be called "glassing", I'm sure). Just cite them for what the actual danger was: unsafe driving.
Click to expand...

It is quite possible that insurance companies are the ones driving some of these laws ... a law on reckless driving would require some evidence that you were actually reckless ... a law on texting only needs to show you were sending or receiving texts while in the vehicle ... much lower burden of proof if they want to sue you or not pay your claim ;)
 
So they are trying to ban a device with the potential to improve driving safety - that sounds about right for the currently elected government.
 
I am betting that Glass will include GPS technology at a MINIMUM. You probably also will get a speedometer, traffic updates, and maybe even some kind of optical enhancement like infrared. So these legislators are going to look like fools when the final product is announced, and it IMPROVES safety!
 
jnemesh said:
I am betting that Glass will include GPS technology at a MINIMUM. You probably also will get a speedometer, traffic updates, and maybe even some kind of optical enhancement like infrared. So these legislators are going to look like fools when the final product is announced, and it IMPROVES safety!
Click to expand...
It does not include GPS or a speedometer or traffic updates. That all comes from your phone. GG is a passthrough device for your phone. Oh, and WTH? Infrared enhancement? Do tell.
 
Briguyatx said:
So they are trying to ban a device with the potential to improve driving safety - that sounds about right for the currently elected government.
Click to expand...
Yes, because West Virginia's state representatives have a lot of power in our nation's congress.
 
Skirge01 said:
A local radio station was talking about newly increased fines for texting while driving and brought up a VERY good point, which covers this Google Glass issue as well:

We already have laws to tackle this.

It's generally called careless or reckless driving. Regardless of the cause of the bad driving, you can be pulled over for either of these, depending on the severity. We don't need additional laws to cover texting, talking, or Google-glassing (soon to be called "glassing", I'm sure). Just cite them for what the actual danger was: unsafe driving.
Click to expand...

Enforcing existing laws won't win you re-election. That's why the politicians want to pass new ones.
 
I'm trying to decide if this is like texting while driving, or more like using a bluetooth headset instead of holding a cell phone while driving?

If we are going to ban anything that could be distracting, we should start with passengers. And using a hands free phone is really only less distracting than holding the phone in your hand, and only moderately less distracting. I'm sure there are accidents because someone is looking at the car radio at exactly the wrong time. Better remove those from cars too. I'm sure there are accidents because people don't know how to drive a manual transmission. Maybe we should ban those, or at least require additional experience.

I would think that a well implemented GPS on a heads up display would be less distracting than having to look over at the device on the dash. I would think there are a lot of ways a heads up display could provide a lot of benefits while being minimally distracting.

However, I also once knew someone who liked to read books during their hour long drive to and from work, which seems obviously unsafe.

Google glasses would make it easier for a lot of people to do really stupid things while driving, but a lot of them are stupid things they can already do now in an even more distracting manner.

I think it would be wise for the auto industry and those making devices like Google's Glass be proactive and come up with some safeguards and some ways to limit the use of the devices while driving. Bans tend to be difficult to enforce and less effective.

I'm sure insurance companies would love to be able to subpoena any logs or video from a driver's glasses. Technology is putting increasing restrictions on our rights to privacy. I'm worried that it won't be long until the police can subpoena records of who was in an area from cell phone companies and then subpoena any video or audio recordings from devices like Google glass. I can see the police looking at it just like subpoenaing witnesses to testify, just more reliable.
 
Monkey God said:
Exactly. Heaven forbid a government act in a preventative manner instead of reactive. However in general I prefer laws that are more generic "no distracted driving" like texting, putting on makeup or eating a fucking salad while driving. (I just saw this the other day and had to WTF).
Click to expand...

Wait... if eating a salad is bad does that mean I shouldn't eat my cereal while driving into work anymore???? :p
 
It is already illegal pretty much everywhere, but these people need something to do with their time, so why not this?
 
kbrickley said:
It is quite possible that insurance companies are the ones driving some of these laws ... a law on reckless driving would require some evidence that you were actually reckless ... a law on texting only needs to show you were sending or receiving texts while in the vehicle ... much lower burden of proof if they want to sue you or not pay your claim ;)
Click to expand...

That's a good point. That would make it much easier to write citations and would reduce court costs, because "Don't use (blank) while driving" is nearly impossible to argue against, at least compared to "reckless driving".

However, the concept of Google Glass is to have the screen above your standard field of vision, meaning you'd have to glance slightly up to see the screen. Your eyes are not supposed to be fixed on the road at all times (you're supposed to maintain awareness of your speed, people behind you, to your sides, etc), so it's debateable whether or not this would be a distraction.

Of course it's SUPPOSED to do this. I've never used one, and it would likely be a long time before I ever will, so I don't really even know if it actually is a distraction or not.
 
I think it is definitely premature to approve or disapprove the technology for driving ... sensory memory is virtually unlimited and if that was all that was being accessed then I don't think there would be any issues ... however, Google glass could perform functions that will access short term working memory and long term memory ... although our brains are usually pretty good multitaskers, the more involved the task becomes, the more CPU cycles our brain devotes to the task ... if Google glass allowed access to functions that were distracting there could definitely be a problem ... we just need to see some actual data (and this sort of thing would be very easy to test)

Personally I would like to see Google push a full heads up display for their driverless vehicles ... advanced augmented reality or text/email/search interfaces using the windshield would be seriously cool ... especially for those who weren't born with the Borg genes :)
 
wonderfield said:
No, they're 'banning' it so they can issue citations for its use. Citations mean revenue.
Click to expand...

Hardly. Banning wearing "sun-glasses" while sun-glasses only works in the aforementioned situation where you've taken out all of the boy scouts for maximum points but failed to swerve to miss hitting the street light and weren't wearing your seat belt and went flying into the drive-thru of Wendy's. Whereupon perhaps somebody observed the Google Glasses that went flying through the drive-thru and landed on the other side of the restaurant.
 
Also, nobody pointed out that by the time Google Glasses become a reality that is everywhere it will probably be all-but illegal to drive yourself. Google Car will drive you.
 
I see this as an excuse for cops to pull people over for wearing eyeglasses on the pretext of enforcing the no google glass law.
 
madmat said:
I see this as an excuse for cops to pull people over for wearing eyeglasses on the pretext of enforcing the no google glass law.
Click to expand...

Please step out of the vehicle ... slowly hand me your eyeglasses ... FREEZE!!!! ... I said no sudden movements :eek: :D
 
Revdarian said:
http://www.theonion.com/video/new-wearable-feedbags-let-americans-eat-more-move,14238/


There, fixed that with the proper HandsFree device!
Click to expand...

This is hilarious! lol

On a side note, since Glass has a software, shouldn't Google limit it's functionality when driving? I think a hud display in front of you is amazing. And if that's the only navigational data being display then distraction is minimized. Also, the ability to record while driving is also great, you don't have to mount a camera to record while. This is a good thing when an accident happen, they can play the footage on what happen.
 
They already have this. It's called distracted driving. They can give you a ticket for just about anything if the officer feels you are distracted. Hell, they can give you a ticket for smoking in your car if they feel it was hampering your ability to drive... Why do we need another law?
 
KarsusTG said:
They already have this. It's called distracted driving. They can give you a ticket for just about anything if the officer feels you are distracted. Hell, they can give you a ticket for smoking in your car if they feel it was hampering your ability to drive... Why do we need another law?
Click to expand...

Not to justify it but there could be several goals:

1. Insurance companies benefit from the additional laws since it allows them to invalidate claims if they can show you were violating a law when the accident occurred.

2. Reckless and distracted driving laws are subjective (officer's judgement) so if the "alleged" violator decides to protest and take it to a judge or jury it can become a "he said"/"she said" sort of argument ... also many cases get thrown out since the arresting or ticketing officer isn't always available for the trial/hearing ... laws like texting or google glass restrictions are easier to verify since they are more objective and produce an electronic trail

3. People like to protest all types of fines/tickets but especially traffic ones ... the more stuff they can throw at you, the higher the likelihood of something sticking (even if you take it to traffic court)

4. The 4th amendment restrictions don't protect you from things that are in plain sight ... laws like seat belts, texting, etc give the officer probable cause to pull you over ... when they walk up to the car they are allowed to look in your windows ... if you had drugs or alcohol in your car they could arrest you for that (even though they didn't pull you over for that) ... also, if you had a person in your trunk or something they could catch you for that :eek: (so don't text with a body in the trunk :p )

5. Lawmakers tend to like to pass laws, whether we need them or not, makes them feel like they are earning their inappropriate pay or payoffs :D

Those are some of the reasons that I can think of off the top of my head :cool:
 
Before we go making things illegal, could we please get some real data showing harm? The whole point of laws like this is to protect the life and safety of the public. Maybe we could prove that not allowing its use would do that before we vilify the product.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top