Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Hardware

US Regulators Seek To Reduce Road Deaths With Smartphone 'Driving Mode' (theguardian.com) 291

Posted by msmash from the bettering-things dept.
US regulators are seeking to reduce smartphone-related vehicle deaths with a new driving-safe mode that would block or modify apps to prevent them being a distraction while on the road. From a report on The Guardian:The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) are to issue voluntary guidelines for smartphone makers, which will seek to restrict the apps and services accessible on a smartphone being used by a driver. US transport secretary Anthony Foxx said: "Your smartphone becomes so many different things that it's not just a communication device. Distraction is still a problem. Too many people are dying and being injured on our roadways." The NHTSA is hoping that Apple, Samsung and other popular smartphone manufacturers will adopt the guidelines in future smartphone and software releases. The so-called driving mode will block distractions such as social media, messages or email, stop the use of the keyboard for communication activities and also restrict access to websites, video and distracting graphics. The intention is that the driving mode will be adopted in a similar manner to the airplane mode common to most smartphones and connected devices, which restricts radio communications while airborne. Airplane mode has been a feature of smartphones since 2007.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Regulators Seek To Reduce Road Deaths With Smartphone 'Driving Mode' More

US Regulators Seek To Reduce Road Deaths With Smartphone 'Driving Mode'

Comments Filter:

  • stupid and too late (Score:4, Insightful)

    by sxpert ( 139117 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @10:41AM (#53345979)

    better put money in making autonomous vehicles more affordable...

    • Re:stupid and too late (Score:5, Funny)

      by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @10:59AM (#53346113)

      better put money in making autonomous vehicles more affordable...

      Well fuck it, let's just stop educating humans altogether. Clearly we should just give up on the human race and let the machines think for us now.

      Somehow I feel I should use the word "Millennial" in here too, just for the hell of it.

      • All for education, but... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by fyngyrz ( 762201 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @11:10AM (#53346219) Homepage Journal

        Education is wonderful, but we can't fix stupid. Yet.

        • Though with any luck within 20 years we'll make stupid a fuel source.

          • Re:All for education, but... (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Gription ( 1006467 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @01:56PM (#53348107)
            "Any time you automate an ability you lose that ability." People will never become better at driving as they are less a part of the driving experience then they were even a decade ago.

            This all misses the bigger level of stupidity of a whole NHTSA mandated "new driving-safe mode". How does a smart phone know what seat you are sitting in? If you want to hear a big outcry put the restrictions in place and wait for the passengers in cars, buses, and trains start to whine.with a new driving-safe mode.

            Just dumb, dumb, dumb...

        • Re:All for education, but... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by unixisc ( 2429386 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @11:36AM (#53346459)

          You can say that again. I was an insurance agent trainee 2 years ago, and often carpooled w/ my boss. She had reckless driving habits - watching videos on the phone, doing snapchat, and another trainee would happily play Candy Crush Saga when she was at the wheel. I would offer to drive so that they could happily play, sometimes they accepted, sometimes they declined. My boss' response was: "So far, I've never had any accidents"

          • Re:All for education, but... (Score:5, Informative)

            by gnick ( 1211984 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @12:13PM (#53346919) Homepage

            Without question, the examples you gave are irresponsible. However, the "DriveMode" function on my phone pissed me off bad enough in one swipe for me to kill it.

            Leaving home for someplace I've never been - Mapped it before leaving and checked the recommended route. Got someplace unfamiliar and went to check the map - I was greeted by a "stop light" hand and the caption, "It can wait." I then (while in traffic) had to figure out how to clear the damn DriveMode and set it to leave me the hell alone. This single experience soured me on DriveMode, at least as it's implemented on my phone (AT&T LG Vista).

            • I've used Drive Mode in the past in my Lumia 520: this was in Windows Phone 8.1, and pretty pleasant. Haven't had an opportunity to try it on my iPhone. On the Android, you have to go into settings and disable it

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by gfxguy ( 98788 )
              True - the nagging can actually make it worse. Touch on the pre-entered name of the location I want to go to, and the phone, realizing it was moving in a manner that it could only be in a car on the road, it asks if you're NOT the driver. Instead it should go immediately to directions.
        • We can't fix stupid, but nature provided us with a cure from day one. Not content with limiting early death incidents to only the stupid, we invented ways to keep them from killing themselves before they could harm others.

          Bravo, humanity.

      • Clearly we should just give up on the human race and let the machines think for us now.

        Where have you been, I gave up on the human race years ago, I for one welcome our new autonomous overlords.

  • Block everyone or the driver? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by OffTheLip ( 636691 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @10:42AM (#53345989)
    Seems like this is a difficult problem to solve. Ideally the individual has sense enough to make the obvious choice to not interact with their device while driving. Sadly, that has not proven to be the case.

    • Exactly - if it's "enforced" then anyone in a moving vehicle - car, train, bus - will be blocked.

      • Re:Block everyone or the driver? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by fuzznutz ( 789413 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @11:04AM (#53346155)
        My girlfriend has a Camry with a fancy Navigation System. It's useless. The passenger cannot change anything as long as the car is in gear. We end up using our phones when going anywhere in her car. It's a $1,000 white elephant. It also sucks for trying to find a destination anyway.

        • There is a good reason for that: it's a safety feature. I have a Subaru Crosstrek w/ Starlink. If the car is in gear and I enter the address or place search mode, I can't type anything until the car is stationary. So I'd either have to pull over, or come to a stop until I can enter an address. The way your girlfriend could get around it is pull over, enter/change the address, let it navigate, and then merge again. Yeah, yeah, I know if you are in the passenger seat, you could do all that while she is d

      • Unless those people are smart enough to figure out how to swipe their finger down from the top to pull up the service menu and click off the GPS. But that's probably too involved for everyone but those hacker people...

    • If someone is so bored driving that they look to their smartphone for stimulation, that person is going to be distracted without their cellphone as well. It's not like there were no distracted drivers before we had cell phones.

      • You accidentally used the broad tip brush there. Oops.

        I know, from personal experience, that boredom isn't the cause. It's the fact that these devices have become a crutch.

        Do you even know anybody's phone number anymore? I mean, actually memorized? How about street addresses or even directions to places? How often are you talking to someone while driving? Even "hand's free" talking is still distracted driving. How often do you need to seek through several layers of menus to find the thing you want to listen

        • I don't remember people's phone numbers, but that ain't the point. Point is that when I am driving, I listen to the radio - either the news, or music. If I need to call anybody, I do it before the trip, or after. If I'm driving somewhere that I can't find the directions, I'd stop, call the person and it will happen over the car system, and then I'd keep driving while talking.

          I think the GP was talking about people who play w/ their phones while driving. I described above 2 people I've seen who did tha

          • I think the GP was talking about people who play w/ their phones while driving. I described above 2 people I've seen who did that - one would do snapchat, and the other would play candy crush. This when there were usually 3 or 4 people in the car, and we could, and were chatting as well. I see no reason to do that if one is a driver. If one is alone, like I usually am (the above was 2 years ago), then just listen to the radio or your own music collection. If one is w/ others, chat w/ them. Nothing really justifies the driver playing w/ her iPhone: driving requires ones complete attention to begin w/.

            Do you have an aversion to the word with or something?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by gfxguy ( 98788 )

            I would ignore calls before I had bluetooth integration (hands and eyes free). My new car has a steering wheel button to answer the phone, I don't even have to glance at it. I also think I'm one of the few people who has the self control to completely ignore text messages while I'm driving. I think the phone is a great addition to my commute - IHeartRadio, or Pandora; much better than the morning talk shows that are 40% commercials. Waze is a million times better than getting a brief traffic report ever

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by arth1 ( 260657 )

          Do you even know anybody's phone number anymore? I mean, actually memorized? How about street addresses or even directions to places? How often are you talking to someone while driving? Even "hand's free" talking is still distracted driving. How often do you need to seek through several layers of menus to find the thing you want to listen to? How about notifications from the device? Do you need to know the response to that important query you threw out there before you got in the car?

          I remember some people's phone numbers, but not everyone's. But that's beside the point, because I don't call people while driving.
          If it is so important that it can't wait, then it's so important that you can stop to make a call. And if it is not important enough to stop over, it's not important enough to risk a crash over either. Don't call.

    • Re: Block everyone or the driver? (Score:4, Informative)

      by thundercattt ( 4205847 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @10:52AM (#53346055)
      Not really. I mean anyone who plays Pokémon Go (kid does) knows as soon as you speed up in a car the app asks you if you are the passenger and you have to click ok to continue. Apps can incorporate this feature into theirs. As soon as you hit that speed up moment, the phone puts itself into airplane mode. This feature is disabled if Bluetooth or connected to hands free items.

      • And someone who is driving would never choose the option that says you are a passenger. /s

      • Re: Block everyone or the driver? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by swillden ( 191260 ) <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @11:27AM (#53346375) Journal

        Not really. I mean anyone who plays Pokémon Go (kid does) knows as soon as you speed up in a car the app asks you if you are the passenger and you have to click ok to continue.

        Thus creating an additional distraction for the driver, who now needs to look at his phone to find and tap the "I'm a passenger" button.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gfxguy ( 98788 )
          Yes - I agree completely, with some apps. Pokemon Go not being one of them... but navigation and music and the normal things you might otherwise have going on your phone while you're driving should just default to your usual choices and just go without further asking you anything at all. That would be the safest (other than not using the phone at all - but that's not going to happen).
      • Wrong. Pokemon Go doesn't do that anymore. It still displays the message, but it stops ALL in-game events from occurring when traveling at speeds over 30MPH. It does not matter if you are passenger or driver.

      • Not really. I mean anyone who plays Pokémon Go (kid does) knows as soon as you speed up in a car the app asks you if you are the passenger and you have to click ok to continue.

        bulletproof

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gfxguy ( 98788 )
        I think it's a great idea for pretty much every app - but when I click on a predefined destination in my navigation app, instead of just going straight to navigation it asks if I'm the passenger.... making me even more distracted, because now I have to answer questions (and lie that I'm the passenger). Or if you start up your music or news apps, they should just start playing the audio instead of nagging you... that would cause LESS distraction. So it's actually very rare - maybe a half dozen times I've h

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Salgak1 ( 20136 )

      Think of it as Evolution in Action. Those who use their apps while driving, will tend to remove themselves from the gene pool. . .

      Me ? I use two apps: the Google Maps/GPS for driving, and the voice app for controlling it. ..

      • I'm sure that will comfort you when one of them hits you as you are walking across the street with the light and get hit by someone who is paying more attention to their phone than their driving. I've almost been hit a couple of times because the driver has been looking at their phones instead of seeing the stop sign.

        • When you are a pedestrian and you see a car approach, don't you look through the windshield to get the mood of the driver? I do, and if I see that he's in a hurry, I wait for him to pass. Very often, when they make eye contact, they give you the right of way. If I saw the driver even talking on his phone, let alone playing, I wait for him to pass and be out of my way before I continue.

          • When you are a pedestrian and you see a car approach, don't you look through the windshield to get the mood of the driver? I do, and if I see that he's in a hurry, I wait for him to pass. Very often, when they make eye contact, they give you the right of way. If I saw the driver even talking on his phone, let alone playing, I wait for him to pass and be out of my way before I continue.

            If you can see the mood of the driver and think its still ok to cross infront of him you either have super zoom o vision or are very quick to get across. I'd say if you can see the drivers face clearly enough to gauge mood you want to be waiting.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by gfxguy ( 98788 )
            That's OK in some areas, but not in a city with 5 lanes of one way traffic.... but yes, you don't just assume drivers will give you the right of way that they should; you'll live far longer assuming they won't.

      • Think of it as Evolution in Action. Those who use their apps while driving, will tend to remove themselves from the gene pool. . .

        Except that they tend to remove other people from the gene pool who weren't dumb enough to play with their phone at the same time. So the gene pool is not improved because it has the same net number of dumb asses as before the accident.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by TheCarp ( 96830 )

      Its even more difficult when you are ignoring that its actually an old problem that you never made much progress on.

      Cell phones are entirely new in the past generation, but, there has been no uptick, overall, in distracted driving deaths, certainly not like you would expect if they were an actual cause and not simply a new preferred choice for distraction.

      Distracted driving was always a problem. The only solution is to remove humans from the driving equation entirely. This will only change the symptom, more

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by epine ( 68316 )

        Cell phones are entirely new in the past generation, but, there has been no uptick, overall, in distracted driving deaths, certainly not like you would expect if they were an actual cause and not simply a new preferred choice for distraction.

        Someone who wasn't distracted by their own fatuous logic would expected the road fatality rate to decrease on a VMT basis due to ongoing improvements in vehicle safety, road design, trauma surgery, and ongoing public education efforts.

        I'd parse List of motor vehicle dea [wikipedia.org]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Sloppy ( 14984 )

      You need to think of this as a UI guideline, not a gun pointed at someone's face. A quasi-standard, not a regulation (even though it might be coming from regulators).

      If done correctly, a user will select the best mode, not to save their life, but to maximize their own convenience. People do want to interact with their device when they're driving, and this isn't even a mistake. The problem is that the best UI when you're not driving, is a horrible UI when you are driving, and probably vice-versa.

      Depending on

    • The driver mode settings on one of the platforms - forgetting which - enables one to mention if one is the driver or passenger.

      Last year, I rear ended someone while driving for Lyft, as I was busy looking at my phone to see where exactly the passenger who had just summoned me was located. I was actually headed to a fork in the freeway, but there was traffic backed up at the exit, and the car in front of me had come to a sudden halt. By the time I noticed that, it was too late.

      But otherwise, when I get

    • I've had to make three trips across state in the last week, about 3 hours each way, on local roads and state highway routes. I interacted with my phone a lot along the way, from the map to the music to a couple phone calls and incoming texts.

      I also interacted with the radio, AC/heater controls, bottle of Coke/Mt Dew, and snacks. I can even say I interacted with other cars as we had to navigate around accidents on at least three occasions.

      My viewpoint is that if you can't operate you vehicle safely while mak

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by avm ( 660 )

        My viewpoint is that if you can't operate you vehicle safely while making limited use of your smartphone, you can't operate it safely while not using your smartphone.

        This. So very much this. Mind you I'm a huge proponent of hands-free, but the overwhelming point is that if you are unable to drive safely without both hands on the wheel, you are unable to drive safely at all. Cars and other motorized vehicles do have more control inputs than just the steering, accelerator and brakes.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gfxguy ( 98788 )
        There's this fallacy that people have that they think just because they've managed to not get in an accident yet that it means they are somehow capable of the distractions where others aren't. Specifically, while having your map application and music playing (especially with integrated steering wheel controls), or answering the phone hands free might be fine - reading text messages (again, unless your phone/car read them to you without you having to look) is terrible - as is responding to them. Just becau

    • According to the summary, this should work like airplane mode.

      So, how does your phone detect that you're in an airplane? Right. It doesn't. It relies on the user putting the phone into a mode that can be operated safely in a plane.

      So, the driver and only the driver would set his phone to car mode. In other words: This is about having all manufacturers something like "Android Auto".

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gfxguy ( 98788 )
        Am I the only one with the self control to ignore text messages while I'm driving? What do you need a special "mode" for?

  • This depends on the phone operator putting the phone into driver mode. I think the people least likely to do that are the most intense phone users.

    This sounds great in principle, but is it really going to do any good?

  • Disable maps (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Snotnose ( 212196 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @10:52AM (#53346057)
    Knowing how government works the first thing they'll disable while the car is moving is your navigation app.

    • What we need is a way to tell the smartphone 'if navigation app X is running, don't bug me with anything else'. No reminders (can't do anything about them until I have arrived at my destination anyway), no messages (especially not plastered over the middle of the navigation info while trying to negotiate a complex junction), and (looking at you Apple) no bloody system updates!

  • Please block portrait mode video (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RogueWarrior65 ( 678876 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @10:53AM (#53346067)

    I'd be happy with a feature that forces cellphones to shoot video in landscape orientation.

    • I don't mind portrait mode, as much as I hate that they always show the full-height video with a wider zoom of it filling the rest of the screen. Just show the video with a black background so I can watch it without the distraction of movement all around it.

  • Require two hands on the steering wheel that will beep after 5 seconds (enough time to shift gears, change radio station, take a sip of coffee) and record each frequency on the car's black box.

    (obviously, there would be overrides for one handed people)
    • No, I tend to drive while resting my right hand on the shift lever. Power steering doesn't require two hands, and virtually every car has power steering now.
      • My left hand is in the half of 6 position, and my right elbow happily rests on the console, w/ just my right thumb touching the steering wheel

  • One ass I work with has a 90 minute commute to work.

    He was apparently gloating to people at lunch that he watches videos on an iPad which he keeps on the steering wheel during the drive.

    He's already totaled one car (luckily no one else was involved).

    Frankly, I don't think too many people would be upset if he drove himself into a tree (he's not a particularly likeable person). My problem is if he hits another car on the road.

  • Real world disconnect... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CODiNE ( 27417 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @10:57AM (#53346099) Homepage

    I'm just guessing.... that maaaaybe these legislators don't ride the bus often?

    • I'm just guessing.... that maaaaybe these legislators don't ride the bus often?

      Not legislators, bureaucrats (NHTSA). That is the problem. These "regulators" are always looking for new ways to justify their jobs. If they don't come out with new and improved ideas for us little people regardless of the practicality, usefulness, or hardship on those little people, Congress may not think they need as big a budget next year. It's a good thing they always know what's best for us. Mommy can't be around forever, you know.

  • My phone already has Android Drive on it, which is designed to interact through voice instead of touch.

  • " The intention is that the driving mode will be adopted in a similar manner to the airplane mode common to most smartphones and connected devices, which restricts radio communications while airborne."

    Um, no, Airplane Mode restricts radio communication when it is enabled. By a user.

    And my phone can't tell if it's airborne or not unless it lost all personalization and app settings again, thank you HTC and Google..

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Sloppy ( 14984 )

      I think people are inferring too much heavy-handedness.

      Look at it this way: Airplane mode successfully restricts radio use while airborne, because it is enabled by the user.

      (See what I did there?) Correct operation is defined as the computer doing whatever the user wants it to do. The user is in charge of balancing convenience with desire-to-not-be-a-dick, so he'll select what is most appropriate for his needs.

      Airplane mode works! It's great. It's one of the best, most successful, easily-understood interfac

  • This is not solved with software. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @11:11AM (#53346223)

    The solution here is rather simple. It's called real fucking punishment for the people hurting or killing other humans on the road in incidents where distracted driving was clearly the cause.

    Insurance companies should not cover any costs. The individual should have to. Suspended license for 12 months. On top of that, no US cellular carrier is legally allowed to issue offenders a phone in their name for a period of 6 months.

    Driving while operating cellular devices is already against the law. Enforcement is only effective with actual deterrents. If we had real punishment, we wouldn't have to be going to such extremes as motion-sensitive apps, or trying to figure out how to block the driver and let the precious snowflakes in the other seats continue to feed their cellular addictions.

    • It's called real fucking punishment for the people hurting or killing other humans on the road in incidents where distracted driving was clearly the cause.

      I think the crime you're looking for is called manslaughter. It's similar to a murder charge but implies carelessness more than intent.

    • The solution here is rather simple. It's called real fucking punishment for the people hurting or killing other humans on the road in incidents where distracted driving was clearly the cause.

      If you want to see how effective this is you merely need to look at drunk driving laws. It would have some effect but it wouldn't eliminate the problem. It also doesn't bring back to life the people that were killed by those who chose to behave irresponsibly.

      The only solution that would actually work would be to basically restrict ALL phones in a car that is determined to be driving on a road automatically with no user option to override. This is technologically feasible. Yes this is an (overly?) harsh

    • By the time you hurt or kill someone, it's too late. No punishment or fine will bring someone back from the dead.

  • ..how will they (compulsorily) limit this to the DRIVER? Anything short of that is nothing more than window-dressing to make legislators feel they're "doing something".

    As they say: "Such driving modes are already implemented within certain Android smartphones, including Samsung models, but they are not compulsory and are up to the users to activate."

    If they're already in place, are they making ANY difference? I'd guess not: people who are conscientious enough to voluntarily use the feature, are probably a

  • If they realy want to do something useful it's suggest the auto makers interrogate with phones as in get the hell out of the way. That means let them take over the touch screen and access the steering wheel controls etc. Give them access to the built in GPS etc. Then get out of the way, it might ruin 3k nav packages that suck and need $200 updates yearly.

    Bonus points for putting in HUD's again and letting the phones access those.

    Making cars safer can not be about restriction, it's not blocking IM's/email

  • there are many other distractions. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by anthony_greer ( 2623521 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @11:42AM (#53346539)

    Before smartphones there were handheld cell phones, radios to be fiddled with, newspapers to be read, makeup to be applied, food to be eaten, and children in the back seat to be yelled at...all activities being done by people who have come very close to kitting me at one time or another....lets make and enforce law against distracted driving without singling out particular distractions.

  • what is more dangerous? Talking on the phone hands-free or pulling over to the breakdown lane to handle a phone call?

  • Comment removed (Score:3)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday November 23, 2016 @11:58AM (#53346763)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Once a thing becomes enough of a problem where it's obvious it isn't going to fix itself, rules / laws and regulations show up to fix it for us.

    Personally, I'm all for it. Been asking for it for years.

    I see WAY too many people fiddling with their phone while driving. If I were to make an estimate, I would say one in four of everyone I'm driving around are on their phone.

    Since people are too damned stupid to realize their behavior puts everyone ELSE at risk, then we have to rely on other methods to deal wit

  • Require all phones to be able to be turned completely 'OFF', and require them all by law to be 'OFF' when the driver is driving. Phones in the back seat in the posession of a passenger are exempted. Cop finds you alone in your car with a phone turned on, you get a ticket, no excuses.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kuzb ( 724081 )
      That's completely idiotic. Your phone can be on it a car without you interacting with it.

      • Your phone can be on it a car without you interacting with it.

        Then why is everyone having so much trouble with this??? You can continue to stick your head in the sand all you want but it won't make the problem go away. There's laws and penalties in place already and they have done no good whatsoever to stop the problem, so apparently more draconian measures need to be implemented. Maybe if we force people to not have turned-on phones in their cars, it'll reduce traffic fatalities enough that the self-driving car fanatics will stop trying to push for them to be mand

  • The data on cell phones causing an increase in accidents has never been statistically sound. It is based on assuming an untested contrapositive - If some percentage people in accidents were using their phone, then people not in accident were not using their phone.

    The upwards trend in the use of mobile phones has coincided with a downwards trend in accident rates. There are many other variables in play.

    I don't expect any measurable difference when they do this. They will do it in a way that the efficacy can'

  • How do you propose to tell the difference between a passenger and a driver?

Slashdot Top Deals

Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.

Close