That's all well and good, but the driver doesn't know the location of the urgent care in the next town to take care of the kid who's getting sick in the back seat. Also, speaking from experience, after 25 hours in the car, a couple who's been married 20 years is probably just as well off not trying to make conversation. And I don't know about you, but I can only read for so many hours before I need to do something else.

My first choice is always to read or talk, but on long trips it's nice to have choices.

For what it's worth, I doubt I'll ever have this. Personally I wouldn't pay much for it. Last time we bought a car, we actually switched to a different line of car so that we could get one WITHOUT the in-car electronics (even worse, with a Microsoft operating system). And I refuse to buy a smart phone; I have a cell but I rarely even turn it on, and all it does is make calls and text.

They tried to force me to carry a smartphone for work, they bought it and paid for it and everything, it took me some talking to get out of carrying it.

Internet access would be nice on long trips, but I'm not going to spend thousands for the capability. I might pay $50 to have mobile internet access during a long trip, but I wouldn't pay for it every month; I simply have no need or desire to be connected at ALL times.

It makes wanna go live nomadic life like this couple: https://www.downtheroad.org/, I just wish I had the finances to do this. I'm a geek, I like tech, I like the internet, but this is getting ridiculous, most people are simply too dumb to be able to do anything else while operating a vehicle. And no, this is not a stereotype, it's the ugly truth.

Adam

NC law currently bans use of text services on mobile phones while driving. The exceptions are for caller-ID displays on phones (no outright ban on cell phone use yet), GPS displays and dispatch systems. Is it reasonable to conclude that this ban applies to general text based communication devices built into the vehicle?

Given that automakers are failing to restrain themselves wrt GPS functionality and complexity (Google Earth -like capabilities are NOT appropriate for the driver to access) I would prefer removing the exception for GPS devices built into the car.

"§ 20-137.4A. Unlawful use of mobile telephone for text messaging or electronic mail.
(a) Offense. – It shall be unlawful for any person to operate a vehicle on a public street
or highway or public vehicular area while using a mobile telephone to:
(1) Manually enter multiple letters or text in the device as a means of
communicating with another person; or
(2) Read any electronic mail or text message transmitted to the device or stored
within the device, provided that this prohibition shall not apply to any name
or number stored in the device nor to any caller identification information.
(b) Exceptions. – The provisions of this section shall not apply to:
(1) The operator of a vehicle that is lawfully parked or stopped.
(2) Any of the following while in the performance of their official duties: a law
enforcement officer; a member of a fire department; or the operator of a
public or private ambulance.
(3) The use of factory-installed or aftermarket global positioning systems (GPS)
or wireless communications devices used to transmit or receive data as part
of a digital dispatch system.
(4) The use of voice operated technology

This is the key. Use of voice activated technology is growing leaps and bounds. Don't any of you guys have Dragon Voice software on your PCs for writing text (ahem....like this letter) and computer commands?

Once these things are voice activated...and, also helpful would be projection of video choices on the windshield so that it is on the drivers' line of sight....most of these concerns will disappear.

roughstuff

Well I haven't gone far enough to use Dragon... but my talking GPS is great... I never have to take my eyes off the road while I get directions from the GPS. And of course I don't program it when I am moving.

The real issue is that far too many motorists don't have the personal discretion to NOT use such devices in a moving car. And according to news reports, apparently those with the least amount of driving experience also tend to text the most. (youth). Bad combination!

Ford offering this internet temptation themselves may be subject to future law suits in the event of terrible collision. You'd think their lawyers would think these things out.

I think talking GPSes that tell the driver when to turn may be a safety benefit by discouraging use of maps while driving.

However, I really, really hate the idea of allowing drivers to search or select destinations while the vehicle is driven. I think such features should require the vehicle to be stopped AND the vehicle to be in park or the parking brake to be on, or be actuated from the passenger seat on a display invisible to the driver, and enabled only when a passenger is seated.

You mean you talk to your GPS, etc., as well as it talking to you? I do find those GPS voices to worse than muzak. Where do they GET these people?

roughstuff

Have biometric sensors in the steering wheel. Upon sensing two hands on the wheel it will unlock the "park only" access to electronics for the passengers.

I hope that if these distracting devices become OEM built-ins, that the vandalism of cars with and/or theft of the devices becomes a significant problem. If there's reason and justice in the world, that WILL happen.

Then they'll just cut them out of your car, like an airbag.

I've seen cyclists riding no hands, in the dark, no lights, against on coming traffic, looking downwards, talking on the phone. All at the same time.

I have an aftermarket unit... a Garmin actually. Usually when driving, my wife does the actual wheel work and I act like the GPS... But I had a need to go out of town without her (death on my side of the family) and I had to both drive and navigate... The GPS was the right solution.

Voice recognition/command GPSs are available. But I don't think the technology is quite there yet. I could be wrong, voice recognition has come quite far since I used to test cell phones back in the day.

But I figured that it would be highly unlikely that I would need to change my destination mid route, and not be able to pull over to program it, so why spend the extra money.

As far as the voice on my GPS... I have a vast selection of voices... oddly enough the Australian woman seems to be the most soothing... but she can't pronounce the Spanish street names so predominate in the southwest. Neither can the American voice... so that took a bit of getting used to. (La Jolla is pronounced "la hoya," not "la joe la") Also rather strange is the fact that the American woman voice tended to be rather sharp and clipped... "naggy" if you will. Didn't like that.

Like cell phones, and any other such device, all it takes is a bit of personal discipline as to when and where and how to use these things. Frankly, I don't even use my cell phone in restaurants, and certainly not in service lines, and definitely not when I am driving. (all cell phones have a voice mail feature that will hold messages until a proper opportunity exists to respond)

We should not have to make laws dictating when, where, and how to use things like cell phones and GPS and in dash DVDs... personal responsibility should be enough... but apparently it is not. Apparently we are a nation of undisciplined children that need their hands slapped when any little temptation comes along to skylark. I wish it were otherwise... but with the examples of Enron, and Bernard L. Madoff and even VPs with shotguns trying to hide their mistakes... the reality is we don't have a great national record of personal responsibility.

Time will tell of course, but I really don't see the addition of yet one more dashboard distraction as a good thing. I hope Ford et. al. gets their collective butts sued by someone over these... maybe then those in charge will say... "gee... maybe this just isn't a good idea." I won't hold my breath however.

I almost hate to say it, but I think I'd rather share the road with a drunk driver vs. a distracted driver.

Truer words never spoken. The entire nation needs to go to boot camp.

I brought up the suggestion of some sort of HUD before. To me that does make a degree of sense, because as you said it wouldn't require the driver to take his or her eyes off of the road. And they can be programed so that they display the information for a short period as well as limiting how many times in a given time-frame that they can be accessed/activated.

As good of an idea as that is, there are people who just wouldn't survive boot camp.

HUD would, however, require the operator to rededicate their attention to something other that the road and external environment as well as rededicate their visual concentration to a virtually closer point of concentration. I know it would be a bit much for me.

I might survive booties camp.

roughstuff

...and this is bad how?

I read recently that something like 75 percent of the people who try to get in the army aren't even admitted in the first place; they're too fat, they're on drugs or they're too diseased to even be considered.

Boot camp for other things, for driving, I think there is a better solution:

1) Much more driving instruction. All learning drivers should have to go through 100 hours of classroom instruction, 100 hours of simulator use, then 100 hours of in car driving instruction, now you can get a partial licence, this would allow you to drive during daylight hours in dry weather, no freeways, no passengers under 21. If you get caught drunk driving you immediately fail and need to start over. After a suitable time period you need to take skid pan training and the enhanced simulator course, to get your full licence. The enhanced simulator course would put you behind the wheel of a couple of larger vehicles, a 30' straight truck, a 40' passenger bus and a tractor-trailer with a 53' trailer that is loaded to about a tonne shy of it's load limit. This would give the new driver the ability to see it from the other guys boots. Different simulator, but the same idea, puts you behind the bars of an electric motorcycle, where at least 40 times per hour, some idiot in a Yaris passes you with an inch to spare.

2) All drivers should need to take a refresher course every 5 years, and re-qualify. This includes a medical.

3) All vehicles should be subject to an annual safety inspection, this would include a pollution test, failure results in the plates being pulled, until you can get it repaired and retested so that it passes.

4) Any driver caught driving while impaired, on a first offence, has their licence suspended for 5 years and then cancelled, they need to start all over. If in their impaired state they caused a collision that resulted in damage or injury, they must make full restitution before they can start the process of getting a new licence.

5) Any driver caught with a suspended licence is subject to a fine of not less then 50% of their annual income, or 3 years in jail.

Wow, pretty harsh... but OK.

How about if we start with cycling and road use classes in elementary school like the do in places like Copenhagen? There they have places on the school playground all painted out like a typical road intersection and you ride your bike in this "simulator" to learn proper traffic rules.

The thing that always gets me about drivers' education is that we spend a lot of time teaching the 3 Rs and then drop the ball on this other life long activity... road use.

Of course, in 20 years or so it may not matter... if robot cars finally arrive.

True, particularly if they're broken to the point where they couldn't drive any more. ;-)

In 20 years in many not matter because gas is $45/gallon.....

I seem to remember back in the early 1970's my small town school doing exactly that, and giving out a small booklet with the relevant sections of the highway traffic act in it and diagrams of dealing with turns and traffic. We also had Elmer the safety elephant and had visits from the local police safety officer.

I remember the same thing back in the late 60's. Doesn't happen anymore.

I've always pushed for cycling to be taught to school kids. I even did my part by teaching a few classes on my own, but what's needed is a coordinated effort and cash committed so the kids can be taught.