System to block drivers from making or taking calls being developed
engaging in the conversation itself is deadly because it distracts the driver when his full attention should be on the road.
The researchers say that the system could also be used to send a car's registration information to a traffic post whenever the driver makes an illegal turn, speeds, runs a red light, etc. The authorities could use the information to mail out citations to the owner of the vehicle.
1. thedarkside (Posts: 652; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
i do not agree with this. i dont text while driving but sometimes i get calls. i dont hold the phone to my ear leaving one of my hands to drive (which really doesnt matter because if you can drive manual you can function a car using one hand), i use headphones with a mic. it allows me to keep my focus on the road while being able to talk to whomever may have called me.
maybe they should inquire using a mobile phone into driving test? i know id pass, im a good driver. i watch out for other cars, motorcycles, etc. i know how my sweet grandma car handles in all weather. i definitely wont buy a car if this technology is put into them. i dont see any use for it when it comes to myself.
5. nak1017 (Posts: 328; Member since: 08 Jan 2010)
I can't put enough thumbs up for yout statement
27. mikeguy1981 (Posts: 82; Member since: 23 Jun 2012)
I welcome thedarkside and all its ultimate wisdom!
33. thedarkside (Posts: 652; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
not sure if that was sarcasm but i laughed a little and gave you a thumb up.
13. OptimusOne (Posts: 694; Member since: 22 May 2012)
theres this thing called a bluetooth headset. :P
15. thedarkside (Posts: 652; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
i also listen to music because some asshole broke into my car and stole the faceplate to my stereo. thats why i have the headphones with the mic and i also dont like bluetooths.
2. glenwf (Posts: 11; Member since: 14 Jun 2012)
holy violation of civil rights, Batman!
there are so many flaws in this idea i don't even know where to start...
3. thedarkside (Posts: 652; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
thats basically what i was trying to get at. im super annoyed with my day and overly caffienated so it may not make perfect sense to some.
16. tward291 (Posts: 559; Member since: 14 Feb 2012)
if this goes wide spread in America it would probably be used for government vehicles. also I see companies using this with there vehicles that there employees use,
17. roscuthiii (Posts: 1923; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
Yeah. when I saw the title the first thing that popped in my head was drivers for companies and government vehicles.
I highly doubt it would be implemented in private vehicles. The case could be made that if there were an accident and you're trapped in a vehicle with no help in sight and this thing running that it would prevent the necessary emergency communications.
23. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
The technology to interrupt cellular transmissions already exists. Don't believe me? Find the schedule for one of Obama's campaign stops. Go to the event. When Obama's motorcade drives by, check to see if you have cellular signal - you won't. It is the same technology that is used to interrupt roadside IEDs in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Feds just haven't made it widely available.
4. MorePhonesThanNeeded (Posts: 645; Member since: 23 Oct 2011)
"The researchers say that the system could also be used to send a car's registration information to a traffic post whenever the driver makes an illegal turn, speeds, runs a red light, etc. The authorities could use the information to mail out citations to the owner of the vehicle." what the hell kind of crap is this? How do they judge illegal turns, because any road with a double solid line in it is illegal to make a U turn, yet peolice don't go ape s**t and give tickets for it.
These researchers are going about this the wrong way, i don't want some signal jammer to block the phone reception and how would it pinpoint and jam only one phone in the car? Sounds like magic technology that doesn't exist or ever will. Cell phone and car manufacturers should develop a system that recognizes when the driver gets into the car and has a cell phone, it will automatically sync with bluetooth and ask for confirmation, which you give consent to. Now if you do not give consent when you get a call the car will begin to flash the hazards and notify you that you must either give sync consent or pull over. The hazard lights will not stop until you either pull over safely or not answer the call. Will work by scanning the driver seat and whomever sits in it and the console for phones. The phone itself will scan for a driver seat signal and go directly into bluetooth discovery mode. This idea would get both phone makers and car makers to take some sort of responsibility and try to reduce on the road accidents.
14. Aeires (unregistered)
Hi, my name is Big Brother, and it'll be 1984 for the rest of your life.
Government, stay the heck out of my car.
6. iamcc (Posts: 1319; Member since: 07 Oct 2011)
Before we start doing crazy shit like this how about first we just make sure that everyone who's on the road actually speaks English.
If you cannot speak or read English there is absolutely no reason for you to be driving, screw whether or not you're on a phone.
11. NexusKoolaid (Posts: 362; Member since: 24 Oct 2011)
Perhaps, but that's another topic entirely.
20. CanYouSeeTheLight (Posts: 1078; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
Yeah, because only people who speak english can drive.. /s
31. iamcc (Posts: 1319; Member since: 07 Oct 2011)
No but only people who speak/read English can read road signs written in English.
Such as "Right turn only"
Sometimes that's helpful when driving.
7. downphoenix (Posts: 2741; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)
How about a system for getting people to use common sense behind the wheel instead?
9. thedarkside (Posts: 652; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
unfortunately PA only allows people to give one thumbs up per post. you deserve more!
10. nak1017 (Posts: 328; Member since: 08 Jan 2010)
Or atleast make the driving test a little more difficult...
19. GuiltyBystander (Posts: 199; Member since: 05 Mar 2012)
Unfortunately, common sense is so uncommon.
12. OptimusOne (Posts: 694; Member since: 22 May 2012)
i bet a car will crash. the jammer is still on, the driver is still in the car about to die with his phone. and he can't call 911 or whatever the emergency number is in india
18. BabyWade (Posts: 42; Member since: 12 Jun 2012)
I like this idea alot since I have friends & family who do that but I have two problems with this: 1) In the event of a car crash will you be able to make phone calls. 2) I'm not a big fan of the fact that it will send a message to the police if I do something wrong.
21. hybrid06339 (Posts: 23; Member since: 16 May 2012)
Perhaps they should ban all passengers from vehicles since they can be distracting (also don't have to worry about jamming their phones since they won't be there). This approach however might greatly increase traffic congestion.
22. jove39 (Posts: 1478; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
Mobile signal jammers in car...yeah...sure...won't take much to rip them off and throw on garbage!
24. jtc8008 (Posts: 11; Member since: 24 Feb 2012)
If this is implemented, then they might as well make it illegal to talk to passengers, turn the volume on the radio up or down, look behind you, touch your mp3 player, change a cd, adjust the temperature and pretty much anything that takes your hands off the wheel (How bout make everyone drive an automatic so they don't take a hand off to shift). Ridiculous! It is just as likely to get in a wreck telling kids to be quiet than talking on the phone. How about people just drive safely on their own. Driving is a risk if you are afraid to drive don't drive.
25. EclipseGSX (Posts: 1703; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
Exactly! Why not just 100% automate cars like in iRobot at that point.
26. fraydoe (Posts: 57; Member since: 27 Dec 2011)
lol i understand all the comments for this article but i think we can all say that this is never going to happen in the US of A . theres just too many arguments, and its from a university in india! come on now
28. kslaughter32296 (Posts: 11; Member since: 12 Aug 2011)
Okay, I already see a few problems with this system. 1, what if a family member or friend of yours has an emergency, and you're the only one in the car to take the call? Then, if that person dies or gets seriously injured, the system is to blame. And two, I agree with the part about the red light running, but the illegal turns and speeding. Umm, for one, I had to make an illegal u turn the other day to prevent having to drive miles down a road I don't know to turn around and get to where I need to go, because I missed my turn and my van was overheating. And speeding, well
29. kslaughter32296 (Posts: 11; Member since: 12 Aug 2011)
It's impossible to not speed at some point In time. I mean really.
32. Willi (Posts: 2; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)
There are much better, less sophisticated, systems than this one. The directional antenna system has been beaten to death on the USPTO site.
34. preet27in (banned) (Posts: 173; Member since: 07 Jul 2012)
IDIOTS.. WT HECK BLUETOOTH DEVICES MEANT FOR THEN??? USE EM .....
37. Reluctant_Human (Posts: 878; Member since: 28 Jun 2012)
Makes no sense. What if you're a passenger? What if you let someone drive your car? It's retarded.