I find myself in a conundrum. I'm a certified techno-geek, and I'm also a huge proponent of personal responsibility/accountability (versus expecting Mother Government to protect us from ourselves).
However, the latest announcements from CES and the Detroit Auto Show suggest a level of in-car information, and potential distraction, even I'm starting to question.
For instance, the latest information from Audi indicates the new A8 will have a touchscreen to allow drivers to write by tracing letters on a touchpad with their index finger. The system will also deliver detailed satellite maps via Google. Sounds like some cool technology, but exactly how is "writing" on a touchscreen less distracting than taking notes on a notepad? And should people really be looking at detailed, satellite-based images to navigate while driving?
Audi's not alone. Ford's new MyFord Touch system will let drivers do everything from posting on Twitter to checking email. Much of the system uses voice commands and certain features, like browsing the Internet, aren't available unless the car is in "Park," so it's not like Ford is oblivious to the distraction potential.
Kia is launching its own in-car communications system called Uvo, and like Ford's Sync it will be based on Microsoft's automotive software platform. Uvo will allow for a wide array of entertainment and communication options, with additional features introduced after it launches.
Once again let me emphasize I'm the biggest technology fan out there, and I can't wait to play with these systems. There's a big part of me that wants to tell the "distraction police" to relax, open a nice book, put on a Glenn Miller record and just leave us technophiles alone.
Yet there's also the realistic driver in me, and that part can't imagine this level of information and technology being fed into a car without some negative consequences. I've always felt driving skills (likemost things) vary from person to person, so making a broad statement like, "Talking on the phone while driving should be illegal because you can't do both safely" is a laughable statement. That's like saying nobody can run a 600-foot slalom course at over 65 mph without hitting cones and/or losing control of the vehicle. True for many people, but not true for everyone.
The real question is: How much is too much when it comes to information versus driver distraction? As with navigating a slalom course at high speed, the answer will vary somewhat from person to person. But I fear we're at the start of a steep learning curve; one that will require a few unpleasant lessons before we come up with an answer that works for most drivers most of the time.
By ahightower
on January 26, 2010
05:42 AM
First of all, Glenn Miller is awesome. ;)
I personally prefer to drive with zero distractions, and wish others would do the same. But, the fact is people are going to do all these things (texting, surfing, etc) while driving no matter how much we preach at them. Perhaps it's better that these features be cleanly integrated with the vehicle, so they can at least be done more easily and with less distraction than if they just continue to juggle their iPhones and Blackberries.
By ahightower
on January 26, 2010
05:42 AM
By the way, I think it would be nice if every car was outfitted with a blinking yellow light on the roof. If any electronic device inside the car was detected to be on, your idiot light would blink so that the rest of us could know what we were dealing with. And you would be required to stay in the far right lane or get a ticket. :)
By brn
on January 26, 2010
06:45 AM
If they'd just put better speech recognition in these devices, we'd be set. No need to be all touchy.
They wouldn't outlaw talking into a device. Would they?
/s
By greenpony
on January 26, 2010
10:07 AM
While I wouldn't go as far as ahightower and drive with ZERO distractions (no caffeinated beverage and no radio on my monstrous commute would make driving much more boring -- and hazardous to the people around me should I nod off), I do prefer to drive with a minimum of distractions. No talking on the cell phone, no searching for CDs or iTunes tracks, limited conversation with passengers... Other people should be thankful that there are some of us out there who still prefer to pay attention to piloting massive objects at high speeds rather than txting our bff's. I don't know how many lives I've saved, but I know I've saved myself the agony of severe personal injury on numerous occassions. I say NO to more potential distractions.
By firstwagon
on January 26, 2010
01:54 PM
I think the biggest problem is all rules have to apply equally to all drivers. However driving skill (and personal responsibility) is something that varies dramatically.
While most people can easily chat on the phone safely in good conditions (and are smart enough not to in poor conditions) there are far too many who lack the ability and common sense to do it without crashing.
I've known too many people over the years for who driving on a quiet street on a nice day is at the edge of their abilities. Throw in any distraction and you've got an accident.
Most accidents do not happen in blinding snowstorms or on high speed curves on mountain roads. They happen in the middle of the day putting around town on the same streets they drive everyday.
My solution is the simplist. Instead of coming up with endless rules for everyone to follow, get rid of the weakest drivers by having much stricter driving standards.
There are plenty of buses, trains and taxis for those who lack the ability or resposibility to drive safely
By tonupboi
on January 26, 2010
02:29 PM
I believe in the other extreme: Nothing more allowed than an AM/FM radio (OK, I'll go with satellite, too). Other than that, no electronics; keep you mind on your driving. Or stop the car and get out.
Yes, this includes banning cupholders as well as advanced electronic devices. It's a car, not a lunchroom.
By firstwagon
on January 26, 2010
04:37 PM
Never going to happen. How do you keep people from talking to their passengers or glancing at a pretty girl?
Besides if you require that level of concentration to drive then you should not be driving.
By estreka
on January 28, 2010
02:46 AM
Perhaps your concern is nagging at you because you can see yourself reaching your limits, Karl. I'd imagine some multitasking savant out there would continue making the argument you've been making up to this point.
The real trick is to have people exercise restraint at their own limits. Obviously, as Americans, we cannot do this. But we do have the technology to notify us when we aren't paying attention. Lane departure, eye scanners, and speed monitors can all give our cars a good impression of our state of being. If we're distracted (or drunk, or high), an intelligent system could intervene.
I'm not saying I'd buy a car with such a system, but serious insurance deductions would be awfully tempting.