• naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    The specific use of phones is barely discussed but worth doing so.

    For example talking on a phone, or even in a car, is highly distracting and delays reactions. Passengers are generally more sensitive to context and weirdly somehow less distracting than phones. So that’s something important to consider.

    Listening to the radio is slightly distracting, and likewise listening to the radio played through the phone with notifications off. Doing this is probably fine and we should design roads and cars around the idea that people will listen to music, or sing, or whatever.

    Fiddling with the radio is extremely dangerous, I’m sure we’ve all been rear ended or nearly so by someone doing it, and probably had a couple of “oops shouldn’t have done that” moments ourselves. Likewise fiddling with phones.

    The idea of banning all phone usage is a non starter, but we can probably introduce regulations like phones disabling certain features while cars are in motion but leaving them as useful for navigation and music etc.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      phones disabling certain features while cars are in motion

      A non-starter, unless it’s an option made available to the user in the way that “car mode” already is. You can’t just have it be automatic, because not everyone in a car is driving (even if the vast majority are). And if you were going purely on speed, you’d end up catching bus and train users too, which are almost entirely not driving.

      • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Mmm you can definitely do stuff with pairing to a car disabling notifications etc.

        if you want to send a text unpair as a passenger.

        Shaping behaviour isn’t about being flawless, it’s about raising the barriers to antisocial behaviour.

        The fact of the matter is that if we want to use heavy machinery we need to be willing to accept some restrictions for safety. you can’t wear thongs in a machine shop and maybe you can’t browse the web with your phone paired to the car.

        • Zagorath@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Shaping behaviour isn’t about being flawless

          I absolutely agree, but I think there are different kinds of flaws. If it creates a mere 2% increase in safety, that’s perhaps worthwhile. But if it’s restricting people who shouldn’t be restricted, that’s a hard no from me. If it’s something as simple as clicking a button that says “I’m not driving”, I’m okay with that. But if it can’t be avoided at all as a passenger, it’s a complete non-starter. If it requires unpairing from the car, that’s a bit of a grey zone, but I’d personally lean towards “no”. Why can’t a passenger be the one to control the music (which must be the main reason to be paired to the car)? Surely that’s increasing safety compared to if the driver is trying to do it?

          • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dude that’s fucking nonsense.

            Just lay out what you’re saying and like really think through the consequences.

            unpairing for a second to check a fact on Wikipedia or whatever isn’t a massive imposition. I’m not even attached to that, it’s just an example. It’s not like passengers wouldn’t control music and drivers would if you had to unpair to Google the year a song came out.

            Anyway setting imaginary specifics aside your argument, taken at face value, would imply all sorts of regulations nobody actually wants rolled back except teenaged libertarians (no shade, I was also stupid once. it happens.).

            • Zagorath@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Dude that’s fucking nonsense.

              Dude chill the fuck out. No, it’s not. Your position is so extreme it’s going to result in zero compliance, because yes, it is a pretty big imposition. It’s a ridiculous idea. Like seriously.

              Lay out what you’re saying and like really think through the consequences. Imagine how ridiculous it would be if a passenger had to unpair their phone every single time they want to send a text message or Google something. It’s a laughable idea.

            • DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zoneOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              please keep it polite.

              I expect cars in the future will have driver monitoring checking if the driver is sleepy, distracted, etc and will sound a warning.

              I think android/ios should do a better job at making distraction free car-modes that only shows navigation and reads out text messages, etc.

              • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Don’t come the raw prawn I’m being plenty polite. At least by Aussie standards. What they said is nonsense, not them. I’m sure they’re a reasonable person afk. We all get a bit of brain damage once we start typing haha.

                I expect cars of the future to not exist given they’re poisoning the world, killing us, and destroying our urban environments but I admit to being an eternal optimist. I like driving, well riding anyway (before I became too crippled), but it’s not something we’re very good at and cars are ludicrious machines for what they’re used for. Like driving a tank to pin up a poster haha.

            • WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              If I’m a passenger when my brother’s driving, I’m probably on my phone most of the time and using my phone for the car’s music, for example. Such a restriction would simply mean my brother would be doing the music while driving.

            • ChexMax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              My car requires you to be in park to pair /unpair at least initially. It’s several steps to pair /unpair after that. Because it’s complicated, if I’m driving a passenger, I end up doing it for them even though I’m driving. Maybe you’re thinking of a whole new system, but calling op stupid and unthinking is short-sighted on your part.

        • Lemmington Bunnie@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have mine set to go to Airplane mode when it pairs to my car’s Bluetooth.

          It stops me being distracted by calls but allows me to listen to my music.

      • Salvo@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I would love if it was disabled for everyone in my car. It is even pretty distracting when someone else (or more than one other person) is trying to have a conversion when I am driving, listening to music, audiobook or podcast.

        Please shut the fuck up when I’m driving!

        • nybble41@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Phone calls are not the feature they would be most likely to disable. You’re more likely to have passengers talking to you with their phones stuck in “driving mode” as they can’t use them to quietly pass the time playing a game or reading or browsing social media or whatever else the driver shouldn’t be doing with their phone.

    • Marin_Rider@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      introduce regulations like phones disabling certain features while cars are in motion but leaving them as useful for navigation and music etc.

      my phone spotify goes into ‘car mode’ when driving, which is even more of a distraction to me, where the usual app i can operate almost in my sleep, the different layout means it takes me more concentration how to figure out how to change songs or whatever, despite all the icons being bigger and technically ‘easier’ to use.

      not that im encouraging using it at all when in the car, im guilty and im sure a lot of people are too, but theres an example where the attempt to make something safer in my case actually made it more dangerous

      • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        sure, and people have made braking assist programs that are hypersensitive and get disabled.

        Exactly because people going it alone make arse decisions is why guidlines and regulations would be a good thing to have.

    • AnagrammadiCodeina@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      In Italy whatever active use of a phone is banned already by the law. If an officer sees you with a phone they can stop you and issue a fine. Stil its not enforced enough

          • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            it’s already illegal you goose. People still use phones while driving. Safety needs to be designed into things, you can’t fine it into existence.

            • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              it’s already illegal

              What is your answer to that? Do nothing else?

              you goose

              smuglord

              Safety needs to be designed into things, you can’t fine it into existence.

              Fines and regulations and especially taxes do shape behavior and always have, “you goose.”

              • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Do you not see me arguing for phones to lock features when in cars or whatever elsewhere?

                We have been increasing penalties for phones, we have deployed automated surveillance cameras that issue fines for using a phone at lights, it’s not working making it double triple illegal wont do jack shit.

                There are rapidly diminising returns with severity of punishment, separation between punishment and action, and perception of not getting caught.

                Unless you want to live in a totalitarian surveillance state where cops can wank to live feeds from our vehicles we need to put the responsibility on the makers of the stupid distraction boxes and toddler crushing machines by using regulations to make the devices safer.

                • thirtymilliondeadfish [she/her]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  could you enforce that though? just drive an older car and/or don’t pair your phone to the stereo.

                  Education campaigns could help, as you say it’s the responsibility of the end user here, but I just think tech-gated solutions won’t get us far enough, if at all.

                  We’re already in a totalitarian surveillance state tbh, we’re talking about what to do with our personal surveillance devices while we operate heavy machinery, most of which is fitted with dashcams as well

                  • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You don’t really need to enforce it at the end user level.

                    You’re not trying to stop reckless Teddy who drives drunk and texts while masturbating. You’re trying to stop people who otherwise have good intentions making a poor decision because of a distracting alert, a passing impulse etc.

                    It’s like a seatbelt alarm. you can ignore it, you can disconnect the chime, you can stuff foam into the speaker. Nobody does, it’s to help people who were probably going to put on a seatbelt anyway make that call, in case they forgot or were going to give it a miss for the short 50 m “just moving the car” drive etc.

        • AnagrammadiCodeina@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It helps, the world isn’t white or black. Many people stops doing things because those things are illegal. Then I agree that there will always be some people doing the bad and some people doing the good regardless of the law.