Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This is one of the funniest things I've read in a while. I love the lack of personal responsibility that goes on these days lololol.


It's not so funny when you or a loved one are injured or killed because of some ******* looking down on his phone. Twice in the last 5 years I have been slammed into by a texter. My mother recently got rear ended at a stop light by one. Another buddy got hit head on riding his motorcycle and nearly lost his life. 12 Surgeries later he's still alive. Yep... the girl was texting.

Self control doesn’t work. Parenting doesn’t work. Common sense doesn’t work. This is an epidemic and I have ZERO faith that it will do anything but get worse.

I hate rules... but I'm all for the ban on texting while the vehicle is in motion. The minor inconvenience is nothing compared to pain, dismemberment or death these jagoffs are causing on an daily basis.
 
It's not so funny when you or a loved one are injured or killed because of some ******* looking down on his phone. Twice in the last 5 years I have been slammed into by a texter. My mother recently got rear ended at a stop light by one. Another buddy got hit head on riding his motorcycle and nearly lost his life. 12 Surgeries later he's still alive. Yep... the girl was texting.

Self control doesn’t work. Parenting doesn’t work. Common sense doesn’t work. This is an epidemic and I have ZERO faith that it will do anything but get worse.

I hate rules... but I'm all for the ban on texting while the vehicle is in motion. The minor inconvenience is nothing compared to pain, dismemberment or death these jagoffs are causing on an daily basis.

Might I recommend a defensive driver course? Somehow I manage to spend close to 2 hours a day on the road and I've never been hit by someone texting, which is already covered by distracted driving laws where it isn't already explicitly illegal...
 
Might I recommend a defensive driver course? Somehow I manage to spend close to 2 hours a day on the road and I've never been hit by someone texting, which is already covered by distracted driving laws where it isn't already explicitly illegal...

I hope you haven't jinxed yourself.

Sorry, but my mother should not have to take a defensive course to avoid idiots.

What about all the accidents and deaths caused by rear ending someone while texting or Facetiming? No defensive driving course will help there if you're stuck in traffic.

I just read that traffic deaths are up for the first time in years. By a lot. Most likely from drivers playing with their phones.

I don't think Apple should get sued, and I don't have a solution for the problem which also lets passengers continue to use their phone. But we certainly can figure out the technology to implement something to help stop such preventable deaths.
 
I hope you haven't jinxed yourself.

Sorry, but my mother should not have to take a defensive course to avoid idiots.

What about all the accidents and deaths caused by rear ending someone while texting or Facetiming? No defensive driving course will help there if you're stuck in traffic.

I just read that traffic deaths are up for the first time in years. By a lot. Most likely from drivers playing with their phones.

I don't think Apple should get sued, and I don't have a solution for the problem which also lets passengers continue to use their phone. But we certainly can figure out the technology to implement something to help stop such preventable deaths.

Surely this is a governmental thing rather randomly taking a business to court ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ and kdarling
Stupid. Just stupid. If this was a 'feature', passengers couldn't use their devices.

As much as I hate to say it, I'm now strongly of the opinion that passenger's rights have been lost by the tens or hundreds of thousands of (mostly young) idiots who insist on driving while texting. Yes, I suppose if it was only their own lives and own property at stake, then I would say "let the Darwin effect" handle the issue. Unfortunately, as a human with people I love and property I like (not to mention my own health/life) at stake, I would now heartily support any measure enacted to make sure touch-screen devices can't be used at, say, above 5mph except for specific apps that would have to be vetted for non-distracted driving use by a safety commission (I suppose media-players, GPS systems, speedometer apps, and other apps related specifically to driving.) It's just too big a problem and no amount trying to teach these people it is dangerous seems to work well.

Speaking of which, I just had to get a loaner car for a while from a garage. The car they loaned me (Mazda CX-9) has an incredibly distracting and hands-down dangerous accessory/dash/navigation/etc system. So it's not just the phones that are a problem, the car designs themselves are in need of regulation.

If nothing else will work, maybe lawsuits will, as distasteful as that is...
 
Last edited:
Reminds me of that super annoying feature in my wife's car where you can't adjust the radio (station, volume, etc) while the car is in reverse. I'm sitting in the passenger seat twisting away at the volume knob because it's on way too loud, but it won't work until she finishes backing out and puts it in drive.

I think it will be very difficult to do this and not screw with other passengers at the same time. And it's really just stupid. People putting on makeup while driving or eating breakfast while driving or tending to an infant in the back seat are all just as guilty of dangerous distracted driving as someone on a phone. Do we need legal remedies to require McDonald's to put a lock on their coffee cups when in a moving vehicle?

Or maybe we should just continue to blame the person that chose to take their eyes off of the road whenever they cause an accident!
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ and milo
Or maybe we should just continue to blame the person that chose to take their eyes off of the road whenever they cause an accident!

Blaming someone does not bring back a dead child. And saying "oh well" doesn't cut it if a tech solution might actually be possible.

Yes, people get distracted while eating, and there are fools who put on makeup while driving. But you know what, even those people usually spot danger out of the corner of their eyes. Smartphone users don't seem to fit that mold.

Smartphone usage is much more akin to drunk driving in tests. It engages part of the brain and takes it totally away from paying outside attention.

Smartphone distraction is becoming rampant. I drive behind people all the time, whom you can see holding their phone up while driving. Especially at night. (I'm sure cops can see it too, but there's never one around when you need one!)

You know, when I was a teen, drunk driving was still looked upon as something that only hurt the driver. Cops would stop you, and then either lead you home with their patrol car, or tell you to drive yourself home. No kidding. But then MADD got started and people started realizing how many innocents were being hurt as well. However, I don't think education will help in this case.

I don't know the solution. Just the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arran and nzgeorge
How does that help save the thousands of lives lost or maimed?

Do you believe people are going to not be stupid anymore?

You can't solve social issues with technology.

The simple fact of the matter is this:
The driver is in control of their vehicle. The driver is responsible for their vehicle while it is in motion. Apple has precisely *zero* control over the fact that a driver may choose to distract themselves while driving and, as a result, negligently lose control of their vehicle. The only person responsible for causing an accident while texting is the person who caused the accident. Not Apple. Not Toyota. Not Budweiser. Not Sony. Not Joe's Crab Shack. The driver.

The fact that you think a company that isn't even on the same road as the driver who caused the accident somehow shares responsibility for the driver's negligence just goes to show how *little* you understand the concept of personal responsibility. Apparently to you it always has to be someone else's fault. Just not the person whose actions actually caused it.
 
You can't solve social issues with technology.

I think you can for this one.

The only person responsible for causing an accident while texting is the person who caused the accident. Not Apple. Not Toyota. Not Budweiser. Not Sony. Not Joe's Crab Shack. The driver.

I think we all agree with that, and we don't think Apple should be sued.

What some of us are saying is that perhaps it's time for automakers and phone makers to come up with some workable ideas together.

Btw, my Moto X recognizes when I'm in motion and goes into driver mode where it automatically announces texts. It can read them out upon voice command, and prompts for a voice response to reply with. Just that alone helps me keep my grubby fingers off the phone while driving, and my eyes on the road. If I'm a passenger, I can override it.

So perhaps a foolproof solution isn't necessary. Just something that defaults to better than what most people have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nzgeorge
yea but carplay requires the proper head unit to be installed, it is very new...IE no one uses it yet. is android auto similar? knowing the fragmentation in the android world, it probably only works with certain devices running the right OS version and the right head unit.

Android Auto is the Android version of CarPlay. In my opinion better - there are more apps and you get Google Maps (and very soon Waze).

You require a new head unit or a new car with AA. Most cars and head units that support CP also support AA.

Android Auto

As I said it locks out your android phone totally and works with any Android Phone running Android 5.0 Lollipop and above (which is pretty much all phones in the last 2-3 years).
 
I'm saying IN THE FUTURE.

Well you didn't say that. And a system that only supports new cars is hardly going to be effective or received well. Even in the future, there will be plenty of cars that don't have keyless entry, or at least don't have a fancy version that needs to detect the positions of individual people relative to the car.

As much as I hate to say it, I'm now strongly of the opinion that passenger's rights have been lost by the tens or hundreds of thousands of (mostly young) idiots who insist on driving while texting. Yes, I suppose if it was only their own lives and own property at stake, then I would say "let the Darwin effect" handle the issue. Unfortunately, as a human with people I love and property I like (not to mention my own health/life) at stake, I would now heartily support any measure enacted to make sure touch-screen devices can't be used at, say, above 5mph except for specific apps that would have to be vetted for non-distracted driving use by a safety commission (I suppose media-players, GPS systems, speedometer apps, and other apps related specifically to driving.) It's just too big a problem and no amount trying to teach these people it is dangerous seems to work well.

Non starter. And going beyond cars, if a phone locks up based on motion how would you even handle people on public transportation like trains? No way people are going to use a phone that stops letting them use it on their commute.
 
I see the purpose of this, but honestly PEOPLE are at fault here. If you're stupid enough to text and drive while putting others in danger, you are at fault. Technically you can put the phone in Airplane mode when you are driving as nothing is as important than your life or others. This functionality loss is as the same or should be the same as an implemented 'Drive mode.' There isn't really a way for it to automatically kick in as if you were a passenger, you would lose your ability to use the phone. I think it's time for the User be held accountable for their actions. People really need to start being adults and stop looking for someone / something to take the blame for being idiots SERIOUSLY. This is a shameful lawsuit driving at apple's money instead of the true safety resolution.


POINT THE FINGER AT THE PERSON USING THE PHONE. IF YOU DON'T HAVE SELF CONTROL THEN MAYBE YOU AREN'T RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH TO HAVE AN IPHONE.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: littlecrossrace
I agree with this lawsuit. Apple knows that their products are being used in potentially lethal ways, and have the technology to prevent this from happening. They have chosen not to explore these options fully, and thus may be liable.

Lockout technology would save thousands of lives per year, and only inconvenience the foolhardy (who among us hasn't been tempted to check a phone while driving?).

EDIT:

I'd like a lockout - with an explicit YES/NO warning by which a person can certify that by using it they are a passenger, not a driver. This would force users to take responsibility.
 
I agree with this lawsuit. Apple knows that their products are being used in potentially lethal ways, and have the technology to prevent this from happening. They have chosen not to explore these options fully, and thus may be liable.

Lockout technology would save thousands of lives per year, and only inconvenience the foolhardy (who among us hasn't been tempted to check a phone while driving?).

EDIT:

I'd like a lockout - with an explicit YES/NO warning by which a person can certify that by using it they are a passenger, not a driver. This would force users to take responsibility.


Do you remember the pokemon go issue... It was stated previously "Do not use while driving" they in the figured out a way to see your speed and stop game play with a simple are you driving 'Yes or 'No. This can be easily bypassed by anyone... Its literally the same thing. They should turn the Airplane mode into Airplane/Car mode, but then you are at the mercy of the user.
 
The issue is that this is a slippery slope, where will it end? Are you going to ban alcohol because some people drink and drive? Electronically limit the speed of all cars? A nanny state isn't the answer, taking some responsibility is.
 
Why is this a story? This idiot really thinks a lock out mode for iphones in vehicles. One it wouldn't be practical as passengers wouldn't be able to use their phones, two it's a safety problem if your blocked from calling emergency services and three why can't people just have the common sense to realise that you shouldn't be using your phone whilst driving.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pm534
This is so stupid. Buy a car giving you the technology to use Carplay and do it. Don't have the money? Put the phone down. And for the guy suing, don't sue Apple for making the phone that he used. Sue the driver. Would you sue Android/Google if it was their phone? If (and I know this is stupid) If he was reading the book would you sue the Author/Publisher?

Makes no sense man..
 
Why is this a story? This idiot really thinks a lock out mode for iphones in vehicles. One it wouldn't be practical as passengers wouldn't be able to use their phones, two it's a safety problem if your blocked from calling emergency services and three why can't people just have the common sense to realise that you should be using your phone whilst driving.

You misunderstand how it works. It is ONLY a lock out on the phone connected to the car display. The idea is that everything safe to do in a car while driving is displayed on the car's entertainment display; which is what CarPlay and Android Auto do.

The difference is that on Android Auto you are not able to start picking up your phone and looking at stuff while driving because the safe usage is displayed on the car screen. In CarPlay you can just do anything on your phone while its connected whilst driving (which isn't safe).

The phone functionality and messages, maps, music and certain apps are all available on the car display. So you can make calls etc; just only using voice as that is safe.
 
I'd suppose that if it were paired with a car audio system, it could shutoff the messages app, and Facebook, Twitter, etc. I don't think there is any way to tell if the person holding the phone is the driver. Sounds like an ambulance chasing shyster attorney looking for college money for their kid.
 
Let's sue the auto companies for not making cars that automatically pull over and park as soon as someone starts using their phone.
 
Imagine I buy a coffee at McDonald's and then I don't go to my car, but to an empty table. Past lots of people. And I'm a bit clumsy, stumble over my own feet, and the coffee goes all over some innocent customer sitting there. That's a reasonably common risk. I don't know how often this happens, maybe one in 10,000 coffees, maybe one in a million, but McDonald's sells an awful lot of coffee, and if spilling coffee causes third degree burns, then you get a lot of third degree burns.

What I don't like at all is your ad hominem attack - McDonald's _did_ save a lot of money because nobody could manage to drink another free coffee. It's a fact. Using the term "tin foiler" is an insult and just shows that you are very willing to use informal fallacies to further your arguments.

that's more now personal liability issue. You spilled, on the people spilled on to work from there about how they go with this. In the US lets be honest...it doesn't even need to be scalding. US is just law suit happy at times.

You see people prepping for whiplash cases in accidents on mild fender benders...seconds after the hit. Which is odd...most at time of impact have their body release natural chemicals, fight or flight stuff, natural pain killers in that mix. You should not feel much unless a really bad accident. I have been rear ended twice. messed my rear bumper up so not full force ramming...but not a love tap either.

You don't feel the stiffness till hours later. Sort of like what older parents feel at amusement parks. Kid likes roller coasters. Some of the more jarring ones I don't feel it till at night hours after leaving park. Good analogy...its what happens to me now as an older parent anyway lol.

My stance better explained with how I live. I have lived in Japan for a while now (they are not as lawsuit happy as the US). 2 unique styles of eating here.

One is yakiniku. In plain terms its grilling for yourself in a restaurant. center of table a cutout. In that cutout either gas run burners or old school is special kind of reusable heat source. Looks like coal but its not. they can reheat for later use. Over this metal grate. You cook on this obv lol.

the only "safety" feature present...a usually 1-2 inch ring metal around the pit. More to make it look nice and cover up edge of the cutout. One's best (and only really) safety net here is common sense and knowing touching hot metal is bad. And to keep your kids in line so they don't touch it either.

Over this you grill your veggies, meat, etc. if you or your say kid touch the grill and get burned...that's all on you. they are under no legal obligation to cover accidents stemming from someone touching an open grill in the center of the table.

Other one is shabu shabu. heat source in center of table...now add pot of boiling liquid. Dip your meat in for a quick boiled cooking. Any accidents that happen....again on you.

Which I find cool. I like my yakiniku. It probably will never reach the US. because on day 1 someone will get burned and send the lawyers. Very small chance it be on purpose. Some people out there...look to set up law suits.


I know not to touch the grill. took my kid to these places even as a baby. parents job to make sure the kid doesn't touch the grill. Kid has not done so in 7 years. The TL;DRwhen I handle hot things...due diligence made.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.