Apple Wants To Block Users From Texting And Driving

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has issued Apple a patent on a system called "Driver handheld computing device lock-out."

There are two main embodiments to Apple's invention. The first concentrates on a lock-out mechanism that requires no input from a vehicle and instead uses on-board sensors to determine when a user is driving. In the second embodiment, the car is able to transmit blocking signals to an iPhone, effectively stopping a user from receiving and sending texts, or using other smartphone functions while in the driver's seat.
Click to expand...
 
I'm sure the Apple iPhone users will look forward to their new subservient role from their Apple Overlord.
 
Can't wait for all the pissed off people who are riding passenger in a car and can't text because the vehicle is moving.

All this because people are too god damn stupid and/or selfish to wait 60 seconds to answer a text.
 
collegeboy69us said:
Can't wait for all the pissed off people who are riding passenger in a car and can't text because the vehicle is moving.

All this because people are too god damn stupid and/or selfish to wait 60 seconds to answer a text.
Click to expand...

If it saves one life its worth it. Too bad if you have to pull over or stop.
 
I don't like Apple but I like this concept. This should be required in all cellphones to stop all the stupid asses who continue to text and talk while driving. Make a person pull over and turn off the car to use the phone. Sounds good to me.
 
collegeboy69us said:
Can't wait for all the pissed off people who are riding passenger in a car and can't text because the vehicle is moving.

All this because people are too god damn stupid and/or selfish to wait 60 seconds to answer a text.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that will be annoying, but worth it if it means fewer texting idiots on the road. I mean in the grand scheme of things, we don't NEED to be in constant texting contact.

Their descriptions seems to suggest they can tell the difference between driving and being a passenger. I don't see how that could be possible. It's probably just a GPS based velocity system, in which case bus and train passengers will be affected as well, which would be certain to be unpopular.

The problem with texting while driving seems to be that almost everyone gets pissed off at OTHERS texting and driving, but then think that they themselves can do it so much more safely... It's the biggest hypocrisy in driving safety.

I'm willing to wager that just about everyone who complains about it, has done it themselves, but then justify it as "I only do it safely" or "I don't take my eyes off the road for that long", or "it's different for me, I am texting my kids!" at the same time as they complain about "those teenagers" texting while driving...

I'm not proud to admit it. And if you are a human being, so - with all probability - have you. As much as I hate texting while driving, I have - rarely - done it myself. As I am doing it, I catch myself justifying why what I am doing is safe, and why what others are doing is not, and then I catch myself in this folly of reasoning, and stop what I am doing.

Our brains are hardwired to want to communicate, and having a device able to send and receive messages like this in a car, is simply too much temptation for the human brain to handle. This problem will never go away through legislation of behavior. Human behavioral patterns are too strong for that. This is a problem that will ONLY go away through legislation enforcing lockout technologies that prevent the use of devices from even being possible.
 
I'm no Apple fanboi, but whoever made that decision for the company deserves a steak and blowjob from a really expensive hooker.
 
HisSvt76 said:
If it saves one life its worth it. Too bad if you have to pull over or stop.
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea how many lives we could save if banned cars? Someone in the US dies every 15 minutes in a car accident. Don't blame cellphones when the real problem is the cars themselves. Make them illegal it'd be worth it trust me...
 
I'll support it only if they can figure out how to only apply it to the driver...

My Moto X has a car mode and it kicks in when I'm on the bus and that is not cool. If you are not driving you should be able to use your device.

As a disclaimer I don't use my phone while driving. It just gets ignored. That what I use "Car Mode" for on my phone it mutes everything,
 
Fanattic said:
Do you have any idea how many lives we could save if banned cars? Someone in the US dies every 15 minutes in a car accident. Don't blame cellphones when the real problem is the cars themselves. Make them illegal it'd be worth it trust me...
Click to expand...

You have to balance every risk with it's benefit.

Its difficult to picture american society functioning without the transportation benefit cars provide, especially with the sorry state of our public transit compared to other countries.

Texting on the other hand is nice, but we'd continue to function just fine without it (or if we turn it off while driving).

Ideally - long term - we'd switch towards public transit or self driving cars, to get the fallible humans out of the equation as much as possible, but we aren't there yet, so we are left with trying to regulate behavior patters that reduce the focus of drivers.
 
Good. I am tired of seeing all these self important idiots who cant wait to get to their destination to answer a call or send a text.

If I had my way, the first time you are caught using your phone, while driving, your car would be taken away for a month. Second time your car is crushed and you license revoked.

Zero tolerance.
 
It's even been mentioned IN THESE FORUMS over the last few years (I know I've mentioned lock outs of anything other than voice commands, GPS, mapping, and pure audio from cell phones moving over 10 mph here over three years ago).

Also fails the obviousness test.
 
Sounds awesome. Now people will only be able to text while stopped at intersections, I'm sure that will work out well.
 
Kueller said:
Sounds awesome. Now people will only be able to text while stopped at intersections, I'm sure that will work out well.
Click to expand...

There will be a lot more people honking as people don't realize it's green, but that is a small price to pay.
 
Zarathustra[H];1040782696 said:
I'm willing to wager that just about everyone who complains about it, has done it themselves, but then justify it as "I only do it safely" or "I don't take my eyes off the road for that long", or "it's different for me, I am texting my kids!" at the same time as they complain about "those teenagers" texting while driving...

I'm not proud to admit it. And if you are a human being, so - with all probability - have you. As much as I hate texting while driving, I have - rarely - done it myself. As I am doing it, I catch myself justifying why what I am doing is safe, and why what others are doing is not, and then I catch myself in this folly of reasoning, and stop what I am doing.
Click to expand...

You lose that bet. I've never texted and driven, primarily because I've only ever sent 6 text messages. When I realized what they cost, and how little value texting was to me when I could just use the stupid phone as a (wait for it) PHONE and actually talk to someone, and then texts cost $.10 each, I said F it. I even went so far (after getting annoyed by Spam Texters costing me money for something I don't use by sending me a text) to have texting blocked on my cell phone.

Not "holier than thou", just more of a skinflint Luddite type, personally. It never ceases to amaze my friends and family that I'm such a technology Luddite, considering the things I've worked on, designed, concepts I've created, etc., and my degrees. But I have no use for "Social Networking"; these style forums are about my limit.
 
Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and NOT buy any phone that has this. Sorry, but freedom > safety all day every day. Unless you can specifically target the driver (you can't) then this is a stupid idea. This is about as dumb as banning alcohol because a small percentage are idiots who drink and drive. Don't punish everyone because a few are morons who can't handle it.

What I would support is increasing fines if you are caught, significantly. And if you cause an accident due to texting and driving, automatic jail time (within reason and depending on the seriousness of the accident).
 
Zarathustra[H];1040782717 said:
You have to balance every risk with it's benefit.

Its difficult to picture american society functioning without the transportation benefit cars provide, especially with the sorry state of our public transit compared to other countries.

Texting on the other hand is nice, but we'd continue to function just fine without it (or if we turn it off while driving).

Ideally - long term - we'd switch towards public transit or self driving cars, to get the fallible humans out of the equation as much as possible, but we aren't there yet, so we are left with trying to regulate behavior patters that reduce the focus of drivers.
Click to expand...

Exactly and public transportation isn't feasible for some. My job is 90 miles round trip everyday with no way of taking any public transportation.
 
RGMBill said:
You lose that bet. I've never texted and driven, primarily because I've only ever sent 6 text messages. When I realized what they cost, and how little value texting was to me when I could just use the stupid phone as a (wait for it) PHONE and actually talk to someone, and then texts cost $.10 each, I said F it. I even went so far (after getting annoyed by Spam Texters costing me money for something I don't use by sending me a text) to have texting blocked on my cell phone.

Not "holier than thou", just more of a skinflint Luddite type, personally. It never ceases to amaze my friends and family that I'm such a technology Luddite, considering the things I've worked on, designed, concepts I've created, etc., and my degrees. But I have no use for "Social Networking"; these style forums are about my limit.
Click to expand...

He said just about everyone, not everyone. Most cell phone plans include unlimited txting these days, so the cost is irrelevant. You've never done it primarily because you don't text. And that's fine. But he is right that most people are hypocrites. Hell, I've done it before, and no I'm not proud of it and yes I think it's stupid and unsafe.
 
i960 said:
Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and NOT buy any phone that has this. Sorry, but freedom > safety all day every day. Unless you can specifically target the driver (you can't) then this is a stupid idea. This is about as dumb as banning alcohol because a small percentage are idiots who drink and drive. Don't punish everyone because a few are morons who can't handle it.

What I would support is increasing fines if you are caught, significantly. And if you cause an accident due to texting and driving, automatic jail time (within reason and depending on the seriousness of the accident).
Click to expand...

"Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter."
 
collegeboy69us said:
Can't wait for all the pissed off people who are riding passenger in a car and can't text because the vehicle is moving.

All this because people are too god damn stupid and/or selfish to wait 60 seconds to answer a text.
Click to expand...

I thought the exact same thing. How is it supposed to differentiate a texting driver from a texting passenger?
 
cdr_74_premium said:
I thought the exact same thing. How is it supposed to differentiate a texting driver from a texting passenger?
Click to expand...
from the article?
Without input from the car, an iPhone relies on data from a motion analyzer and a scenery analyzer to trigger a lock-out mechanism. As described, accelerometers, cameras, light sensors, GPS receivers and other sensing components can be deployed to harness raw data.

The motion analyzer monitors device speed up to a certain threshold that, when reached, is indicative of a car in motion. Making the system more accurate is data from an iPhone's GPS and accelerometer, which can be used to discern whether a user is walking, running or in a moving motor vehicle.

The scenery analyzer is more complicated in that some embodiments require image acquisition and processing to determine when a device holder is in a "safe" or "unsafe" operating area. For example, the analyzer algorithm may find that a user is in the driver's seat by analyzing a photo or video that shows one face and a steering wheel.

Alternatively, if the analyzer sees two faces, one in the driver's seat and another in the passenger or rear seat, the device may be classified as in a "safe area." Further, an accelerometer can be used to ensure the person holding the device does not pan away from the driving cockpit to avoid analysis.

Once recognition and analysis are complete, the lock-out mechanism may be activated according to preset rules. For example, texting may be blocked when a device holder is found to be driving.
Click to expand...
 
Zarathustra[H];1040782717 said:
Ideally - long term - we'd switch towards public transit or self driving cars, to get the fallible humans out of the equation as much as possible, but we aren't there yet, so we are left with trying to regulate behavior patters that reduce the focus of drivers.
Click to expand...

Public transit is not a viable option for most people, especially is suburban or rural areas.
It would take me almost as long to walk to the nearest bus stop as it does to drive to work, and after at least 2 transfers, it would take me over an hour, instead of the 20 minutes it takes to drive.

However, self-driving cars I could go for. They would solve a number of problems.
I’d rather take a 2 day trip in a self-driving car than deal with the TSA and the cramped airplane seats. I just hope they are affordable before I get too old to safely drive :)
 
i960 said:
Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and NOT buy any phone that has this. Sorry, but freedom > safety all day every day.

This is about as dumb as banning alcohol because a small percentage are idiots who drink and drive.

Don't punish everyone because a few are morons who can't handle it.

What I would support is increasing fines if you are caught, significantly.
Click to expand...

your last sentence doesn't seem to fit.
 
Draax said:
Good. I am tired of seeing all these self important idiots who cant wait to get to their destination to answer a call or send a text.

If I had my way, the first time you are caught using your phone, while driving, your car would be taken away for a month. Second time your car is crushed and you license revoked.

Zero tolerance.
Click to expand...

If it's while you are actually driving, I might agree. However, out here in California, you can get a ticket even if you are sitting stopped at a red light, or even if they simply see you with the phone in your hand.

The problem with most Zero tolerance policies is the lack of common sense. Sitting at a red light, and picking up the phone to see who is calling is treated the same as the idiot who is swerving all over the road while they are sending a text.
To me, the law should only apply if you are using or looking at the phone while the car is actually moving. Anything else is just a money grab by the state.
 
Hopefully they will apply this to the iPad too. I seen someone using their iPad, while they were driving, about a month ago. :eek:
 
Wow I can't believe how dumb this is.

Apple going to really bogart a safety feature. Smooth idea right there. "Sorry you can't have seat belts, we still own the patent"

Second they are going to bogart an annoying feature. You're doing everyon one else a favor.

The only way this makes sense if its going to become law and the government is going to essentially mandate car makers buy a license from Apple. Talk about Cronism. Wow.
 
I think I'm going to patent a device for car that blocks all Apple devices from functioning. In a 5 mile radius. Forever, via firmware bricking. That way I can drive around saving people from potential future patent lawsuits.:D
 
nutzo said:
If it's while you are actually driving, I might agree. However, out here in California, you can get a ticket even if you are sitting stopped at a red light, or even if they simply see you with the phone in your hand.

The problem with most Zero tolerance policies is the lack of common sense. Sitting at a red light, and picking up the phone to see who is calling is treated the same as the idiot who is swerving all over the road while they are sending a text.
To me, the law should only apply if you are using or looking at the phone while the car is actually moving. Anything else is just a money grab by the state.
Click to expand...

Just last week I was heading toward an intersection and the idiot stopped at the light, was too busy texting away to notice that the light had gone green. This caused me to have to slam on the brakes, when I had a green, and this effect was compounded for every car behind me.

This is why it is NOT ok to text or use the phone even if it is at a stop light.
 
There were times where I wouldn't be able to do my job without texting in a passenger seat, or emailing/texting on a bus/train.

I absolutely will never buy a phone with this functionality, and I absolutely am not stupid enough to text and drive. Hell, I even have aftermarket voice control set up to switch songs from my android tablet.
 
collegeboy69us said:
Can't wait for all the pissed off people who are riding passenger in a car and can't text because the vehicle is moving.
Click to expand...

If you'd read the article, you'd know the patent is about telling the difference between drivers and passengers.

Zarathustra[H said:
]Their descriptions seems to suggest they can tell the difference between driving and being a passenger. I don't see how that could be possible. It's probably just a GPS based velocity system, in which case bus and train passengers will be affected as well, which would be certain to be unpopular.
Click to expand...

The article describes how.

DeChache said:
I'll support it only if they can figure out how to only apply it to the driver...
Click to expand...

The article describes how. That's what the patent is for.

i960 said:
Unless you can specifically target the driver (you can't) then this is a stupid idea.
Click to expand...

If only you'd read the article, you'd know it is possible.

cdr_74_premium said:
I thought the exact same thing. How is it supposed to differentiate a texting driver from a texting passenger?
Click to expand...

If only you'd read the article, you'd know how.

Arcygenical said:
There were times where I wouldn't be able to do my job without texting in a passenger seat, or emailing/texting on a bus/train. I absolutely will never buy a phone with this functionality, and I absolutely am not stupid enough to text and drive.
Click to expand...

If only... oh, you know the drill by now.

Nicterys said:
You expect too much out of [H] if you think we'd actually read the article.
Click to expand...

This thread is unusually bad even by [H] standards.
 
Kueller said:
Sounds awesome. Now people will only be able to text while stopped at intersections, I'm sure that will work out well.
Click to expand...

Few weeks ago this exact scenario happened.

I was beside the car in question and his lane moved, his car didn't cause he was busy texting. Cop car 2 cars behind him. One got out of his car and knocked on his window (yes he had the time)

You can imagine the rest... :D
 
Draax said:
Good. I am tired of seeing all these self important idiots who cant wait to get to their destination to answer a call or send a text.

If I had my way, the first time you are caught using your phone, while driving, your car would be taken away for a month. Second time your car is crushed and you license revoked.

Zero tolerance.
Click to expand...

Screw that. Ban kids, passengers, and dogs, they all are much more distracting. Christ, ban billboard signs too, their colors take your eyes off the road. Also better bam cups, and eating while driving. These are all more attention grabbing than a frigging voice call. Who needs freedom or rights when nanny state can do it for you? I'd support harsher penalties at most but ultimately you can't legislate idiocy. A law is already in place most areas.... Just like with murder, you are never going to stop it outright despite it being wrong. You make behavior illegal, not tools used for basic living :rolleyes:. 1984 was only 30 years off I guess.

I am disgusted to see all these enthusiastically supportive comments here on this idea.
 
I think they already have a system ,called common sense, if that fails, then the backup police officer or CHP app will initialize it's feature and disable the driver.
 
Outamyhead said:
I think they already have a system ,called common sense, if that fails, then the backup police officer or CHP app will initialize it's feature and disable the driver.
Click to expand...

CHP is resource intensive however, and has a very low capture rate. Building it into the process itself would be helpful, as many lives and dollars are lost by those who wouldn't know common sense if it introduced itself and shook their hand.
 
Fanattic said:
Do you have any idea how many lives we could save if banned cars? Someone in the US dies every 15 minutes in a car accident. Don't blame cellphones when the real problem is the cars themselves. Make them illegal it'd be worth it trust me...
Click to expand...
While they're at it. Lets remove a lot of things that aren't related to driving. Cause there's a good chance it's caused an accident and killed someone.

#1 Radio
#2 Windows controls
#3 Temperature controls
#4 Smoking
#5 Coffee

Also, drunk driving is becoming a bigger problem lately. Every so often I hear on the news that someone that's drunk got into the car and caused harm or death. Lets remove alcohol from society.

Why cell phones then? Cause we can usually see them fucking with their phones. We rarely see people doing the 5 things I listed, and we have no idea what medications people are on while they're driving as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top