An interesting excerpt from this article at "http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/12/technology/12google.html"
---
A student at the University of San Francisco, Mr. Abelson said, made a program that automatically replied to text messages, when he was driving. “Please don’t send me text messages,” it read. “I’m driving.”
---
I guess the next logical step would be to enhance the smart phones to utilize the built-in accelerometer/GPS mechanisms to detect whether the device is travelling too fast (like when it is inside a car) and automatically disable texting !! May be the FCC and DOT should make this mandatory on all new consumer grade smart phones. Looking at the statistics quoted by DOT, about the high percentage of accidents caused by distracted drivers (a good chunk of which are distractions due to texting/calling on cell phones), this doesn't seem like a draconion/big-bortherly move at all in my view. In fact going even more further, why not also disable making/receivng audio calls also, unless it is in some form of hands free mode (speaker phone/blue tooth/integrated with your car mic/audio devices)
Update <3/19/2011....some more thoughts>
While it can sound like a good idea at first thought I can see some challenges around how to implement/enforce such kind of detection and disabling.
1) Not every phone has an accelerometer/GPS
Thats a very valid point. But I guess, we are moving in that direction very fast. Even otherwise it's a > zero game from get go. As more and more smart phones enter the hands of users, it's more and more likely that previously not-texting-while-driving users fall into the trap of that habit due to the conveniences these phones offer that make texting (and a whole lot of other activities that could be distracting while driving) more easier. It's still a winning situation even if the percentage of smart phones with accelerometers vs those that do not have them is currently low, because it is that many drivers no longer distracted on the roads. And that number is only going to grow bigger.
2) How to differentiate whether the texting user is the driver or another non-driving operator (passenger) in the car?? A corollory to that is, what about a texting user who is traveling in a train or other fast moving public transport where he is not posing any danger while texting?
In such cases just detecting the 'acceleration' of the device being used for texting is not enough to deduce that it is a case of 'in-motion-texting' and thus is a cause for concern warranting an automatic 'preventive' action .
But here again, there is scope for some innovative use of other already existing technologies in a novel way to make an intelligent (if not foolproof ) deduction that can help in the decision making. For example, how about embedding a RFID chip in the steering wheels of automobiles and an embedded RFID reader in the smart phones and make use of some type of proximity detection mechanism and thus narrow down the 'in-motion-texting' cases to only those where the perpetrator is the driver.
So , if your device detects that you are texting while moving (at automobile speeds) and that you are so close to a steering wheel that you can't be any one other than the driver, then the device is free to block your stupid and potentially dangerous actions.
3) Ok, how about that really really emergency situation where for whatever reason, I cannot use hands free, nor make a voice call and the only option I have left is to text because the risk of not doing so outweighs the risk of me getting distracted and putting myself and others on road in danger?
Ok, god forbid, if you are indeed in that situation, then fair enough, you are allowed to text. Only thing you got to do is type in (or speak in) the unblocking code (how about 999) first before you text. And there you are, your device will no longer block you anymore even while you are zipping at 100mph. But I hope you won't mind if the device, as soon as you press that unblock code, starts sending a copy of whatever you are texting to the law-enforcement/911 emergency handling center.
I guess you should be fine with that because whatever situation you are in, is so dangerous, desperate and critical, that you are potentially risking your life and those of others on the road by choosing to text and in fact you would have preferred anyway that law enforcement is definitely notified of whatever important message you were going to text!
Update 2
----------
Interesting concept to explore implementing as a mobile app. SMS Nanny or TextingNanny any one :-) , that can be used as a deterrant to prevent kids from texting while driving ! I saw a few SMS nanny type apps out there with a quick google search, but I don't think any of these incorporate the idea of integrating with the accelerometer/GPS to implement an 'in-motion-texting' detection mechanism, and notify the parent immediately, so the, parent can call their child back immediately and catch them in the act so to speak and ask them to pull out and give them an earful (and ground them).
Here you go, consider this my whitepaper publication. So the idea is now out in the public domain, and hence you can't patent it anymore ;-) .
---
A student at the University of San Francisco, Mr. Abelson said, made a program that automatically replied to text messages, when he was driving. “Please don’t send me text messages,” it read. “I’m driving.”
---
I guess the next logical step would be to enhance the smart phones to utilize the built-in accelerometer/GPS mechanisms to detect whether the device is travelling too fast (like when it is inside a car) and automatically disable texting !! May be the FCC and DOT should make this mandatory on all new consumer grade smart phones. Looking at the statistics quoted by DOT, about the high percentage of accidents caused by distracted drivers (a good chunk of which are distractions due to texting/calling on cell phones), this doesn't seem like a draconion/big-bortherly move at all in my view. In fact going even more further, why not also disable making/receivng audio calls also, unless it is in some form of hands free mode (speaker phone/blue tooth/integrated with your car mic/audio devices)
Update <3/19/2011....some more thoughts>
While it can sound like a good idea at first thought I can see some challenges around how to implement/enforce such kind of detection and disabling.
1) Not every phone has an accelerometer/GPS
Thats a very valid point. But I guess, we are moving in that direction very fast. Even otherwise it's a > zero game from get go. As more and more smart phones enter the hands of users, it's more and more likely that previously not-texting-while-driving users fall into the trap of that habit due to the conveniences these phones offer that make texting (and a whole lot of other activities that could be distracting while driving) more easier. It's still a winning situation even if the percentage of smart phones with accelerometers vs those that do not have them is currently low, because it is that many drivers no longer distracted on the roads. And that number is only going to grow bigger.
2) How to differentiate whether the texting user is the driver or another non-driving operator (passenger) in the car?? A corollory to that is, what about a texting user who is traveling in a train or other fast moving public transport where he is not posing any danger while texting?
In such cases just detecting the 'acceleration' of the device being used for texting is not enough to deduce that it is a case of 'in-motion-texting' and thus is a cause for concern warranting an automatic 'preventive' action .
But here again, there is scope for some innovative use of other already existing technologies in a novel way to make an intelligent (if not foolproof ) deduction that can help in the decision making. For example, how about embedding a RFID chip in the steering wheels of automobiles and an embedded RFID reader in the smart phones and make use of some type of proximity detection mechanism and thus narrow down the 'in-motion-texting' cases to only those where the perpetrator is the driver.
So , if your device detects that you are texting while moving (at automobile speeds) and that you are so close to a steering wheel that you can't be any one other than the driver, then the device is free to block your stupid and potentially dangerous actions.
3) Ok, how about that really really emergency situation where for whatever reason, I cannot use hands free, nor make a voice call and the only option I have left is to text because the risk of not doing so outweighs the risk of me getting distracted and putting myself and others on road in danger?
Ok, god forbid, if you are indeed in that situation, then fair enough, you are allowed to text. Only thing you got to do is type in (or speak in) the unblocking code (how about 999) first before you text. And there you are, your device will no longer block you anymore even while you are zipping at 100mph. But I hope you won't mind if the device, as soon as you press that unblock code, starts sending a copy of whatever you are texting to the law-enforcement/911 emergency handling center.
I guess you should be fine with that because whatever situation you are in, is so dangerous, desperate and critical, that you are potentially risking your life and those of others on the road by choosing to text and in fact you would have preferred anyway that law enforcement is definitely notified of whatever important message you were going to text!
Update 2
----------
Interesting concept to explore implementing as a mobile app. SMS Nanny or TextingNanny any one :-) , that can be used as a deterrant to prevent kids from texting while driving ! I saw a few SMS nanny type apps out there with a quick google search, but I don't think any of these incorporate the idea of integrating with the accelerometer/GPS to implement an 'in-motion-texting' detection mechanism, and notify the parent immediately, so the, parent can call their child back immediately and catch them in the act so to speak and ask them to pull out and give them an earful (and ground them).
Here you go, consider this my whitepaper publication. So the idea is now out in the public domain, and hence you can't patent it anymore ;-) .
