Drivers Subject To 'Textalyzer' Scanning Without Consent In New NYC Bill

Status
Not open for further replies.

firefoxx04

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2009
1,371
1
19,660
144
Does it know the difference between incoming and out coming? I fail to see how they can collect enough data to prove that a specific phone was sending information without collecting private information?

This is nothing more than blanket surveillance. First they want to take away encryption and then they want to just listen to everything coming in and out. WAKE UP PEOPLE. VOTE SMART.
 

jkhoward

Distinguished
Nov 24, 2011
1,220
14
19,665
158
This isn't the solution. There needs to be another way to prevent people from texting while driving. Vehicles need to be able to detect if the person is the driver, if they are, there mobile devices will be disabled until the vehicle isn't moving. I have been saying this for a long time, there needs to be an app for parents/adults to install on their phones where if you're moving over X speed, the phone is disabled.
 

firefoxx04

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2009
1,371
1
19,660
144
Wow a down vote already. I am not supporting texting and driving. What I am supporting is privacy and not giving up privacy for safety.

What if someone sends me a text? What if it is hands free texting? What if the passenger is texting on my phone (I do this frequently).

Will this system see my internet traffic? What is being collected? So many questions that these stupid politicians cannot possibly answer.
 

d_kuhn

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2002
704
0
18,990
2
We get way too hung up on the idea of 'privacy'. IMO it is not an invasion of a drivers privacy to determine if he/she was engaged in unsafe/illegal behavior while driving. They don't want to know the details of the text... just the physical actions of the driver while behind the wheel. You have no right to privacy around that information. Take your licks... learn your lesson... and leave the texting for later.
 

oczdude8

Distinguished
This is stupid. Whats the point of checking to see if they were texting AFTER they kill someone? Ok, lets give the driver twice the fines, is it going to bring back someones loved one?

We need prevention before we work on punishment. How about using Drones to take picture of drivers using their phones and have fines mailed to them? Similar to red light cameras or speeding cameras. I'm sure most people will think twice before even texting if they know at any moment a drone could catch them in the act. I think this is a MUCH bigger problem in todays society then speeding.

Oh and there wouldn't be anymore of these conspiracy privacy concerns (at-least no new ones)
 

Gam3r01

Titan
Moderator
This is not the solution here.
I, for example, put my phone in a little shelf above my radio when I drive. If I get a call I ignore it when Im alone. When I have my girlfriend with me (most of the time I drive) she answers the phone for me and talks to whomever it is.
And were back at square one, my word against theirs. Neither of us can prove who actually used the phone.
 

clonazepam

Distinguished
Jul 10, 2010
2,625
0
21,160
119
Brought to you by Cellebrite.

Cellebrite already has roadside devices to scrape the contents of a phone, so this technology would just dial it back a bit. If the legislation passes, Cellebrite would have to bid on the project, as would other tech firms.
They'll just dial it back a bit. Ooh the puns.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/first-came-the-breathalyzer-now-meet-the-roadside-police-textalyzer/
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
138,803
7,321
166,340
21,370
My last truck was killed by a texting driver. Hanging upside down from the seatbelt, covered in broken glass, was NOT the way I wanted to spend my lunch hour.
You will likely not find a person more against 'phone use while driving' than I am.

However, this proposed bill is simply stupid and hugely intrusive.

"Excuse me, Officer? No, I don't have my cell phone with me."
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
138,803
7,321
166,340
21,370


How about using the grey goo between your ears, and drive the damn car?

Hands free does NOT make it better. Your brain is still occupied on things 'outside' the car.
 

mrjhh

Distinguished
Sep 18, 2007
31
0
18,530
0
The law doesn't say the phone owner has to unlock the phone, I don't understand technically how a phone could be field tested. On top of this, my phone automatically reads text messages, and allows sending text messages via voice (as do many). It will be even harder to determine if a message was sent via voice (legal) vs phone keyboard. They might be able to determine this by asking Google/Apple if they performed voice recognition, but not as part of a field search.
 

nix27

Reputable
Jul 28, 2014
36
0
4,530
0
Wouldnt it be better if they added something like a dash cam that keeps track of what the driver is doing and alert them if they keep their eyes off the road for too long. The police can access the videos if there is an accident like a black box in planes.
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
138,803
7,321
166,340
21,370


How about no.
Speaking as someone who does have a dashcam, but pointed the other direction.
 

dstarr3

Honorable
Mar 18, 2014
1,527
0
11,960
52


How about using the grey goo between your ears, and drive the damn car?

Hands free does NOT make it better. Your brain is still occupied on things 'outside' the car.
I'd argue against that. Talking on the phone (handsfree) doesn't require much more concentration than, say, singing along to a song, listening to a podcast/audiobook, or talking with a passenger. And if something happens ahead of you that requires your attention, there's nothing preventing you from focusing on the road long enough to deal with whatever situation. If your eyes never leave the road and your hands never leave the wheel, you're fine. If anything, having the stimulus of music or conversation in the car keeps you more alert and less likely to space out for long periods of time, or worse, fall asleep.
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
138,803
7,321
166,340
21,370


MIT would disagree with you.
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/rrg/papers/trf10-br.pdf

In part:
-------------------------------------------
Although Törnros and Bolling (2005) report that drivers slowed their forward velocity to compensate for the increase in cognitive workload associated with a cellular phone conversation in both hand-held and hands-free conditions, the effect was more pronounced for drivers using a handheld phone. In a recent review, Ishigami and Klein (2009) note that the findings from several studies suggest that drivers tend to compensate for the potentially negative consequences of using handheld phone but fail to do so when using a hands-free cell phone.
--------------------------------------------

Also, it depends a LOT on the type of conversation.
 
How about freeways being setup with cell jammers so no one can text or talk while driving? Then have turn outs without jamming for emergencies.

The only other option I can think of is having a camera mounted on freeway signs to take pictures of the driver in vehicles and save them for a month so law enforcement can retrieve them to see what the driver is doing prior to the accident. After 30days no request for the data then just delete it. You don't have to take anyone’s phones and you can see who was talking on the phone. So no privacy issue or encryption issues no confusion to who was on the phone between the driver and the passengers.
 

synphul

Champion
Moderator
I've thought for years it would be great to simply incorporate a means into vehicles that disables cell phone connection to all except 911. That way people aren't tempted and if they are actually in an emergency situation they can make calls. Obviously they wouldn't be kicked back having a yapfest on 911 otherwise.

This is what happens when everyone is put into a protective bubble, everything offends people and they're all about their 'freedoms'. Common sense goes out the window causing things like distracted driver epidemics that even brings into question things like intrusive laws to help herd the masses back to some level of functionality.

We wouldn't need laws like this if people were responsible and accountable. Of course everyone says 'well it's not ME that's the issue'. Well someone's at fault somewhere or these sort of accidents wouldn't keep happening.
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
138,803
7,321
166,340
21,370


Yay, more cameras! Just what we need.

How about we grow people who are less stupid. This would involve growing better parents.
 

Gam3r01

Titan
Moderator


Right?
Dosent take much to realize "maybe I shouldnt use my technological device in the car".
My stereo came with a remote, why would someone think thats a good idea? Look around for the remote, try to orientate it properly, find the buttons you want etc.
 

f-14

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
2,344
0
19,960
50


How about using the grey goo between your ears, and drive the damn car?

Hands free does NOT make it better. Your brain is still occupied on things 'outside' the car.
I'd argue against that. Talking on the phone (handsfree) doesn't require much more concentration than, say, singing along to a song, listening to a podcast/audiobook, or talking with a passenger. And if something happens ahead of you that requires your attention, there's nothing preventing you from focusing on the road long enough to deal with whatever situation. If your eyes never leave the road and your hands never leave the wheel, you're fine. If anything, having the stimulus of music or conversation in the car keeps you more alert and less likely to space out for long periods of time, or worse, fall asleep.
that's wrong and has been proven time and time again with more strikes against by a 9 out of 10 margin. some people can do it, they however are an exception to the rule, not the norm.

i can honestly tell you i can't do it, when i was younger and a newer driver i could but i was also a very good athlete with cat like reflexes and i snatched birds out of the air all the time. not so good any more these days, i don't practice my reactions and reflex training every single day for an hour or more on end.

personally the cure for this would be to change the driving system so that it required both hands on the steering device and the throttle at all times or the vehicle came to a stop. you could even do what power tool manufacturers are doing with the depressed safety switch before even being allow to start up the vehicle let alone keep it going if that kill switch is not being squeezed.

no way to text if both hands are required to be on the machine at all times inorder to move or operate.
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
138,803
7,321
166,340
21,370


hmmm....that would be at odds with my 5 speed manual transmission.
 

dark_knight33

Distinguished
Aug 16, 2006
391
0
18,780
0


The answer to that isn't that everyone's device is confiscated on a stop and compromised by law enforcement under penalty of loss of license. It's for LEOs to pull people over and ticket them for this when they see it under distracted driving laws. That's how the system works.

Innocent people die every day for stupid reasons. You can't legislate the stupidity out of people. I don't want myself or any member of my family to die because some bimbo can't put her phone down, but I don't think LEO should have their powers expanded any further than they already have. It's ridiculous the amount of leeway their taking with technology, and a line has to be drawn somewhere.


The real answer to this problem is already underway, and none of you even see it. Supercruise & Driverless cars will eventually solve this issue so Stacy can keep her pie hole going while getting to her nail appointment on time without killing Billy coming home from work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS