New System Detects Calls While Driving

Gary writes "Talking on your cellphone while driving isn't a crime in most states, but it should be. Studies have shown that people who drive and talk are many times more likely to have an accident. A new company is releasing a device to automatically detect drivers talking on their cell phones. Instead of police officers needing to observe a cellphone in use, the system automatically detects a cell phone call and records which car was making the call." The article is fairly light on details, but it would be interesting to see how the system differentiates from a driver talking on a cell phone versus a mere passenger.

is it already in place???

[Anonymous Coward]

I may have personally experienced this tech in action. I live in Chicago area and about a month back I tried to call my wife, who I knew was driving, and I got a interesting reply..."the person you are calling is currently driving". The call then ended abruptly. I called a few minutes later and it started working although my wife was still driving....kinda interesting.

Re:Clarify For Me

[Donniedarkness]

I agree with you completely. I fully believe that there are people out there who can talk on a phone with no change in their driving skills (and also, people who can't drive worth a damn while operating a motor vehicle). The solution isn't to ban cell phones + driving, but to get a little more harsh about BAD driving. Besides, what's the differnce between talking to a passenger while driving a stick-shift and talking on a cell phone?

Re:Sooo...

[Technician]

Who thinks a blow up doll in the car will fool this technology?

More important, how many without a cell phone will be tagged because they have On Star. It may take the blinking 12 o'clockers a while to figure that one out.

(Blinking 12 o'clockers, those with every VCR and microwave clocking blinking 12:00)

Re:Here it comes

[quixote9]

The studies are not flawed, have been repeated with the same results so many times I've lost track, and refer to an actual cognitive impairment that has nothing to do with hands-free sets, eating french fries, or listening to the radio. We're social animals and our brains are wired to give social interaction priority.

The two couldn't be in conflict in the good old Paleolithic because if you were doing something where your life was at stake and that required total concentration everybody with you was in the same situation. You wouldn't be avoiding leopards while one guy yakked on about the good time he'd had last night. That's also why talking to a passenger in the car is different. If there's a red light coming up and you're not stopping for it, the passenger will either stop talking or say something about it (according to taste).

What the neurological scans show under simulated driving conditions with actual cell phone usage is that the areas of the brain being used are different when listening to the radio or talking to passengers. Decision-making and processing areas are devoted to the cell phone conversation first, the driving second. The closest analogy is being drunk, even though that feels very different. The effect of not having your brain in gear for the task at hand is similar though.

Re:"but it should be.."

[Sax Maniac]

Maybe, maybe not. By that logic you could argue that DUI should not be illegal, just crashing into people. Otherwise you are infriging on the rights of people who are perfectly capable of driving drunk.

Re:Here it comes

[nehumanuscrede]

Thought!

With GPS finding it's way into phones these days, how difficult would it be to code the phone to disallow
any incoming / outgoing transmissions once the phone is travelling X miles per hour ? ( say 30 mph )

Could be coded to allow emergency dialing only ( ergo 911 ). . . .

Tough part would be what the phone would do if no GPS signal were available I suppose.
( LOL you thought reception of cellular signals were bad )

Re:Sooo...

[dindi]

I talk on the phone using my headset (wireless/bluetooth) while driving and I do not feel a problem about it.

Dialing, checking email, etc. can be a problem, but talking on a headset that does not even have a cord dangling around?

Please explain me this: how is talking to my wife sitting next to me safer than talking to her on the phone through a headset?

I mean, having a person in your car IS more dangerous:

1. you see less (how many times do you have to tell your passenger that YOU have to see not him/her what is on the right?)
2. they make your car less responsive, and add more dead weight
3. they maybe talk to each other (more people)

All that is not there when you talk on the phone, and if you are in a risky intersection, or taking over you can alwasy say :

"Just a sec, have to concentrate on traffic" - I do it all the time ...

So no flame, but I think a headset makes it all good if you can multitask well enough ....

Re:Sooo...

[Anonymous Coward]

To me it is just priorities. When talking to a passenger, my priority is still always driving. I don't frequently turn my head to make eye contact other than when at stoplights or make gestures with my hands etc. In other words driving first, conversation second. When a person has a phone pressed to their face, it is obvious that they believe conversation first, driving second. With a hands free unit or a passenger it isn't that clear and depends more on the individual driver, although if you are a passenger with that person you can usually tell pretty quickly. I don't know how you can legislate a persons priorities beyond the obvious situation of them holding a phone to their face ( or reading a book, applying make-up etc etc)