State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
State Farm has filed a patent for a system that suppresses calls and notifications to a driver's phone while they are operating a motor
vehicle, according to patent documents recently published by the
United States Patent and Trademark Office.
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-f or-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving/
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
State Farm has filed a patent for a system that suppresses calls and
notifications to a driver's phone while they are operating a motor
vehicle, according to patent documents recently published by the
United States Patent and Trademark Office.
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-f
or-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving/
Get it done and implemented.
We see prople driving along holding cell phones up to their face and
watching videos or having animated conversations.
There was a repeat violator negro with no drivers license on a zoom call court appearance with a judge while he was driving.
These people need to be stopped, pulled from their vehicles and beaten sufficiently to put them in the hospital for 30 days at their expense.
The only calls that should be permitted from a moving vehicle are
emergency calls.
JAB wrote:
State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
<https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-for-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving>
Get it done and implemented.
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
State Farm has filed a patent for a system that suppresses calls and
notifications to a driver's phone while they are operating a motor
vehicle, according to patent documents recently published by the
United States Patent and Trademark Office.
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-f
or-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving/
Get it done and implemented.
We see prople driving along holding cell phones up to their face and
watching videos or having animated conversations.
There was a repeat violator negro with no drivers license on a zoom call court appearance with a judge while he was driving.
These people need to be stopped, pulled from their vehicles and beaten sufficiently to put them in the hospital for 30 days at their expense.
The only calls that should be permitted from a moving vehicle are
emergency calls.
<https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-for-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving>
Get it done and implemented.
How does it distinguish between driver and passenger?
On 6/9/2024 4:15 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
<https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-for-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving>
Get it done and implemented.
How does it distinguish between driver and passenger?
It seems to say that a cellphone would be linked to a specific
car, which makes sense. Insurance companies insure specific cars.
Sounds like a good idea. So many people just can't imagine turning
off their cellphone. But if there's a big difference in insurance
costs they'll have a motivator.
Many states now ban handheld cellphones. It makes little
difference. And the cops who should enforce it are busy on
their own phones. Or they're busy giving out tickets for
speeding or "rolling stops". Why? It's a lot easier to just
stand around waiting to hand out another ticket. And nearly
every road has an unrealistically low speed limit. So it's catching
fish in a barrel. Catching people using cellphones is not
so easy.
But that still leaves the issue of talking on a bluetooth
connection without holding the cellphone, or using maps
apps with the cellphone in a holder. I routinely get stuck
behind people driving erratically, looking at their map program
on the dashboard. The phone should be disabled, period,
except for 911 calls, as long as the car is moving... Though
of course it would mean that some people would have to learn
how to read a map. Maybe the ticket fees could be used to
fund free courses. :)
On 6/9/2024 4:15 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
<https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-for-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving>
Get it done and implemented.
How does it distinguish between driver and passenger?
It seems to say that a cellphone would be linked to a specific
car, which makes sense.
Andy Burns wrote:
How does it distinguish between driver and passenger?
It seems to say that a cellphone would be linked to a specific
car, which makes sense. Insurance companies insure specific cars.
On 6/9/2024 4:15 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
<https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-for-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving>
Get it done and implemented.
How does it distinguish between driver and passenger?
It seems to say that a cellphone would be linked to a specific
car, which makes sense. Insurance companies insure specific cars.
Sounds like a good idea. So many people just can't imagine turning
off their cellphone. But if there's a big difference in insurance
costs they'll have a motivator.
Many states now ban handheld cellphones. It makes little
difference. And the cops who should enforce it are busy on
their own phones. Or they're busy giving out tickets for
speeding or "rolling stops". Why? It's a lot easier to just
stand around waiting to hand out another ticket. And nearly
every road has an unrealistically low speed limit. So it's catching
fish in a barrel. Catching people using cellphones is not
so easy.
But that still leaves the issue of talking on a bluetooth
connection without holding the cellphone, or using maps
apps with the cellphone in a holder. I routinely get stuck
behind people driving erratically, looking at their map program
on the dashboard. The phone should be disabled, period,
except for 911 calls, as long as the car is moving... Though
of course it would mean that some people would have to learn
how to read a map. Maybe the ticket fees could be used to
fund free courses. :)
There was a repeat violator with no drivers license on a zoom call
court appearance with a judge while he was driving.
These people need to be stopped...
The only calls that should be permitted from a moving vehicle are
emergency calls.
Newyana2 wrote:
� Many states now ban handheld cellphones.
It makes little
difference. And the cops who should enforce it are busy on
their own phones. Or they're busy giving out tickets for
speeding or "rolling stops". Why? It's a lot easier to just
stand around waiting to hand out another ticket. And nearly
every road has an unrealistically low speed limit. So it's catching
fish in a barrel. Catching people using cellphones is not
so easy.
� But that still leaves the issue of talking on a bluetooth
connection without holding the cellphone, or using maps
apps with the cellphone in a holder. I routinely get stuck
behind people driving erratically, looking at their map program
on the dashboard.
The phone should be disabled, period,
except for 911 calls, as long as the car is moving...
Though
of course it would mean that some people would have to learn
how to read a map. Maybe the ticket fees could be used to
fund free courses. :)
Klyde wrote:
There was a repeat violator with no drivers license on a zoom call
court appearance with a judge while he was driving.
In later news reports it turned out that the guy actually had a valid
drivers license but the government screwed up in reporting it.
These people need to be stopped...
In my younger days (60's) I operated a mobile ham radio CW (morse code)
rig in the car while driving cross country. (Code is like a second
language that can be read in your head without writing it down. I
generally went 20-40 WPM.) Lots of fun. Makes using a mobile cell these
days seem seem like duck soup... :-O
The only calls that should be permitted from a moving vehicle are
emergency calls.
Yup. And tape also needs to be applied to all passenger's mouths...
On 6/9/24 11:42, AJL wrote:
In my younger days (60's) I operated a mobile ham radio CW (morse
code) rig in the car while driving cross country. (Code is like a
second language that can be read in your head without writing it
down. I generally went 20-40 WPM.) Lots of fun. Makes using a
mobile cell these days seem seem like duck soup... :-O
Them days meant a totally different environment all around. Gas was
20 cents a gallon and I don't remember EVER having heard of anyone brake-checking OR refusing (just because they had the right of way)
to let in someone who for any number of reasons ended up merging too
late!
I got my first license in '58 I think and the only requirement was to
be tall enough to be seen over the counter as you reached up to give
the two dollar fee to the clerk at city-hall.
Tape also needs to be applied to all passenger's mouths...
They mostly know when to shut the F up, but some might go into
shrieking fits in a tight spot and that don't help any :-)
On 6/9/2024 12:20 AM, Klyde wrote:
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some
news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
State Farm has filed a patent for a system that suppresses calls and
notifications to a driver's phone while they are operating a motor
vehicle, according to patent documents recently published by the
United States Patent and Trademark Office.
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-f
or-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving/
Get it done and implemented.
We see prople driving along holding cell phones up to their face and
watching videos or having animated conversations.
The only calls that should be permitted from a moving vehicle are
emergency calls.
What conceivable reason would cause you to stop passengers in a car from using their phone, or the drivers phone?
On 6/9/2024 10:43 AM, Bob F wrote:
On 6/9/2024 12:20 AM, Klyde wrote:
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some
news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
State Farm has filed a patent for a system that suppresses calls and
notifications to a driver's phone while they are operating a motor
vehicle, according to patent documents recently published by the
United States Patent and Trademark Office.
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-f >>>> or-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving/
Get it done and implemented.
We see prople driving along holding cell phones up to their face and
watching videos or having animated conversations.
The only calls that should be permitted from a moving vehicle are
emergency calls.
What conceivable reason would cause you to stop passengers in a car from
using their phone, or the drivers phone?
I can see using it if they gave me a big discount on the premium. Doubt
it would ever be mandated.
OTOH, I'm told years ago people did not have phones in cars but that was
in ancient times.
I'm told years ago people did not have phones in cars
� Many states now ban handheld cellphones.
Here in the UK, it's an offence to be using a handheld phone while driving.
Based on reliable *government* statistics (see caveat below):
1. Cellphones had no effect on the accident rate in the USA
2. Cellphones had no effect on the accident rate in the USA
3. Yet, paradoxically, the opposite was in the UK government reports!
Newyana2 wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
How does it distinguish between driver and passenger?
It seems to say that a cellphone would be linked to a specific
car, which makes sense. Insurance companies insure specific cars.
Don't couples share cars over there?
Laws do not change behavior.
On 06/09/2024 9:05 AM, bad sector wrote:
On 6/9/24 08:52, Newyana2 wrote:Laws do not change behavior. We have laws concerning immigration that
On 6/9/2024 4:15 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
<https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-for-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving>
Get it done and implemented.
How does it distinguish between driver and passenger?
It seems to say that a cellphone would be linked to a specific
car, which makes sense. Insurance companies insure specific cars.
Sounds like a good idea. So many people just can't imagine turning
off their cellphone. But if there's a big difference in insurance
costs they'll have a motivator.
Many states now ban handheld cellphones. It makes little
difference. And the cops who should enforce it are busy on
their own phones. Or they're busy giving out tickets for
speeding or "rolling stops". Why? It's a lot easier to just
stand around waiting to hand out another ticket. And nearly
every road has an unrealistically low speed limit. So it's catching
fish in a barrel. Catching people using cellphones is not
so easy.
But that still leaves the issue of talking on a bluetooth
connection without holding the cellphone, or using maps
apps with the cellphone in a holder. I routinely get stuck
behind people driving erratically, looking at their map program
on the dashboard. The phone should be disabled, period,
except for 911 calls, as long as the car is moving... Though
of course it would mean that some people would have to learn
how to read a map. Maybe the ticket fees could be used to
fund free courses. :)
Necessity is the mother of invention, I think we could be amazed at
what drivers are capable of if they have no choice (like stringent
hosting-language examinations BEFORE landed status and not after). The
ticketing will become very fast and could even be autamted via AI. As
for our dearest insurers I see their game already: whip the topic up
real high, raise the rates accordingly, but then keep them there after
the lawmakers have cleaned up the scene :-)
are ignored and we have more number of illegal immigrants today that
ever before, we have laws about murder, murder rates are at an all time high in some places; ................................
It you look at the safety devices required to be put into automobiles
over the last 100 years, each going to reduce traffic accidents by 10%,
we have no accidents today because of the improvement.
You sound like a bicycle devotee.
OK, I should have said laws & enforcement which I postulate is what is normaly meant by 'laws'. There are laws against drug trafficking too but nothing will change until you start shooting dealers on capture. $5000
fines for tailgating, brake-checking or cellphone use could produce
miracles within months.
Here in the UK, it's an offence to be using a handheld phone while driving.
Here in the UK, there are plenty of CCTV cameras around the towns, and
many have number plate recognition.
Probably their driving would be far more erratic if they were looking at
a printed map.
OTOH, I'm told years ago people did not have phones in cars but that was
in ancient times.
bad sector wrote on Sun, 9 Jun 2024 15:02:21 -0400 :
OK, I should have said laws & enforcement which I postulate is what is
normaly meant by 'laws'. There are laws against drug trafficking too but
nothing will change until you start shooting dealers on capture. $5000
fines for tailgating, brake-checking or cellphone use could produce
miracles within months.
It wouldn't change accident rates nor fatalities, but it might statically decrease the length of hospital stays after an accident by a few hours.
We covered this long ago in gory detail, so I'm not even going to look it
up as people who believe in myths will always believe in myths, sans facts.
On 6/9/2024 11:44 AM, Java Jive wrote:
Probably their driving would be far more erratic if they were looking
at a printed map.
�� Let me see... How do I manage to look at a map? Oh, yeah,
I pull over. :)
We covered this long ago in gory detail, so I'm not even going to look it
up as people who believe in myths will always believe in myths, sans facts.
You are fixating on accident rates which are meaningless;
as only one
example hydroplaning 500 feet or more before impact is never cited
either, what is often the blanket attribution is 'loss of control',
period.
How many reports cite irresponsible tire ads as the cause when
they show cars climbimg walls and cruising on ceilings, something that's actually possible but not with consumer cars. Of the reports I have seen maximum about 5% were worth reading.
�� Let me see... How do I manage to look at a map? Oh, yeah,
I pull over. :)
Trying to be a smart arse just makes you look a jerk. There are many,
many driving situations where you can't just pull over to the side of
the road.
bad sector wrote on Sun, 9 Jun 2024 15:41:02 -0400 :
as only one
example hydroplaning 500 feet or more before impact is never cited
either, what is often the blanket attribution is 'loss of control',
period.
I'm extremely well educated in the science & engineering fields and
therefore I am well aware that certain things can be buried in the
aggregate statistics.
However...
If cellphone use while driving is as bad as people say it is, why can they never find any reliable statistics that back up that myth they spout (especially when cellphones went from 0% to nearly 100% in cars in only a handful of years).
People who are dumb believe in myths (I call it "Bro Science").
People who are smart check the facts.
Probably one out of a hundred people are smart.
How many reports cite irresponsible tire ads as the cause when
they show cars climbimg walls and cruising on ceilings, something that's
actually possible but not with consumer cars. Of the reports I have seen
maximum about 5% were worth reading.
Most "tire ads" are bullshit. They play on emotion. And fear.
Most "tire ads" are bullshit. They play on emotion. And fear.
Of course they are, and stupid people try to drive on them expecting
friction that is non-existant i.e. the ads modify their driving
behavior.
How many of your accident reports cite tire ads as the cause?
Everyone watches tire ads yet there seems to be no increase in accident rates. Accidents and rate changes MUST be correlated else they are just statistical noise plus no one will admit that they were on the phone
just before an accident and most won't even be aware that 500 feet
earlier they were hydroplaning because they weere on the phone which
they will deny anyway.
bad sector wrote on Sun, 9 Jun 2024 17:08:44 -0400 :
Most "tire ads" are bullshit. They play on emotion. And fear.
Of course they are, and stupid people try to drive on them expecting
friction that is non-existant i.e. the ads modify their driving
behavior.
Just as the coefficient of friction is stamped on every passenger brake pad sold in the USA, the straightline wet/dry asphalt/concrete friction rating
is stamped on every passenger vehicle tire sold in the United States.
How many of your accident reports cite tire ads as the cause?
My main point about advertisements was only that most people believe in
myths because advertising is the only information they get about things.
Everyone watches tire ads yet there seems to be no increase in accident
rates. Accidents and rate changes MUST be correlated else they are just
statistical noise plus no one will admit that they were on the phone
just before an accident and most won't even be aware that 500 feet
earlier they were hydroplaning because they weere on the phone which
they will deny anyway.
If you're trying to say that the astronomical increase in accident rates
that you predicted from cellphone use was somehow covered up in the
numbers, then all you're really saying is you believe in every myth.
Think about this observation before you respond with more myths...
Given cellphone use in vehicles went from 0% to almost 100% in a meteoric rise in just a handful of years, why does the accident rate increase that
you predict show a _decrease_ in accident rate over that same time period?
If your claim is that "something else" was as astronomically high during EXACTLY the same time period (including levelling off at EXACTLY the same time), then what is that "something else" please?
The fact is most people are incredibly stupid in that they believe myths. Their entire belief system isn't backed up by even a _single_ fact!
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
State Farm has filed a patent for a system that suppresses calls and
notifications to a driver's phone while they are operating a motor
vehicle, according to patent documents recently published by the
United States Patent and Trademark Office.
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-f
or-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving/
Get it done and implemented.
We see prople driving along holding cell phones up to their face and
watching videos or having animated conversations.
There was a repeat violator negro with no drivers license on a zoom call court appearance with a judge while he was driving.
These people need to be stopped, pulled from their vehicles and beaten sufficiently to put them in the hospital for 30 days at their expense.
The only calls that should be permitted from a moving vehicle are
emergency calls.
On 09 Jun 2024, bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> posted some news:[email protected]:
On 6/9/24 03:20, Klyde wrote:
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some
news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
State Farm has filed a patent for a system that suppresses calls and
notifications to a driver's phone while they are operating a motor
vehicle, according to patent documents recently published by the
United States Patent and Trademark Office.
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent
-f or-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving/
Get it done and implemented.
Totally agree, bluetooth included. And since I often equate bad
drivers with dangerous gun owners my view is that both guns and cars
should involve *yearly psychological evaluations*. As a tool to
sharpen my instinct and maintain my accident-free million-mile status
I very often watch youtube 'road' videos and try to spot what will
happen and where. I am horrified by the state of some people behind
the wheel, one exotic monkey recorded his continuous brain-diarrhea
while cutting off and brake-checking another. It was truly depressing.
In over 65 years of driving I've seen far too many families stretched
out like rats under blankets along side of the road and I hope that
Statefarm makes a killing with their patent ...at least until the
incorporation of even more stringent algorithms become mandatory.
Not to mention the "hands-off" driving capabilities being touted by commercials on TV targeting the worst offenders of it now. Telsa, Audi,
GMC, Cadillac. That needs to be removed from all vehicles. Never
should be allowed ever.
It's gonna be an uphill battle because the SYSTEM seeks profits before everything else and people gone for a thousand mile ride have the nerve
to sabotage the SYSTEM not only while sleeping and not consuming any
profit generating goods or services but they also add to it another
twelve hours. Why, that's being AWOL from the appointed menu. You cannot
have such anarchy when even in death you have to generate profits for someone! Much better to get them all into self driving coffins in
duckfile at 200 mph five feet apart which means fewer roads needed and
yet another parasite expense elliminated. The fortunate occupants can
then spend all that time buying things on amazon instead, gobbling ads
for viagra ten-packs, wasting life on facesbook or watching pornos lest humanist values percolate back into society. Too bad if a spec of
fly-shit lands on a five dollar chinese chip and 500 families pile up in
a compression ridge like the Himalayas, just as stiff. That's what
insurance is for after all; no accidents and no one wants to insure
anymore, right? Better yet, if you have the misfortune of really rubbing
some barbie-boy in the neonobility the wrong way then one button on some laptop in Dubai when you're crossing a bridge and your car takes a dive.
On 09 Jun 2024, Bob F <[email protected]> posted some news:v44f3c$3c8h5$[email protected]:
On 6/9/2024 12:20 AM, Klyde wrote:
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some
news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
State Farm has filed a patent for a system that suppresses calls and
notifications to a driver's phone while they are operating a motor
vehicle, according to patent documents recently published by the
United States Patent and Trademark Office.
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent
-f or-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving/
Get it done and implemented.
We see prople driving along holding cell phones up to their face and
watching videos or having animated conversations.
There was a repeat violator negro with no drivers license on a zoom
call court appearance with a judge while he was driving.
These people need to be stopped, pulled from their vehicles and
beaten sufficiently to put them in the hospital for 30 days at their
expense.
The only calls that should be permitted from a moving vehicle are
emergency calls.
What conceivable reason would cause you to stop passengers in a car
from using their phone, or the drivers phone?
Passengers are not driving. What part of "while driving" was not clear
to you?
��� Let me see... How do I manage to look at a map? Oh, yeah,
I pull over. :)
Trying to be a smart arse just makes you look a jerk.� There are many,
many driving situations where you can't just pull over to the side of
the road.
Believing that a cellphone is safer is just fooling yourself.
Just as the coefficient of friction is stamped on every passenger brake pad >> sold in the USA, the straightline wet/dry asphalt/concrete friction rating >> is stamped on every passenger vehicle tire sold in the United States.
There is no such thing as "the" coefficient of friction because that
varies with conditions. The advertised one is under specified conditions
only but it will vary almost infinitely with the JBI index applicable
under the environmental variables.
How many of your accident reports cite tire ads as the cause?
My main point about advertisements was only that most people believe in
myths because advertising is the only information they get about things.
And my main point with tire ads was that misleading ads adversely modify driving behavior, serving as an example of how cell-phones do the same.
Everyone watches tire ads yet there seems to be no increase in accident
rates. Accidents and rate changes MUST be correlated else they are just
statistical noise plus no one will admit that they were on the phone
just before an accident and most won't even be aware that 500 feet
earlier they were hydroplaning because they weere on the phone which
they will deny anyway.
If you're trying to say that the astronomical increase in accident rates
that you predicted from cellphone use was somehow covered up in the
numbers, then all you're really saying is you believe in every myth.
You are the only one who brings up accident rates, everyone else or at
least most others talk about cell-phones being dangerous regardles of accident rates.
Think about this observation before you respond with more myths...
Given cellphone use in vehicles went from 0% to almost 100% in a meteoric
rise in just a handful of years, why does the accident rate increase that
you predict show a _decrease_ in accident rate over that same time period?
Do you have evidence that without cellphones the accident rate would not
be in a nosedive so that even a steady rate could well hide monumental cell-phone causality?
If your claim is that "something else" was as astronomically high during
EXACTLY the same time period (including levelling off at EXACTLY the same
time), then what is that "something else" please?
I do not claim anything in term of accidents or accident rates, what I
do is express the not at all humble opinion that hand-held or bluetooth cell-phone use while driving is very dangerous and should be totally
outlawed or very strictly limited.
The fact is most people are incredibly stupid in that they believe myths.
Their entire belief system isn't backed up by even a _single_ fact!
The myth is that with tire brand X you can drive in a continuous drift
and on walls, and that cell-phone or visual display use while driving is
as safe as being focused and on mental high-beam every minute while
driving. THESE are the myths.
Newyana2 wrote on Sun, 9 Jun 2024 23:04:23 -0400 :
Believing that a cellphone is safer is just fooling yourself.
And yet, cellphones had absolutely no effect on the USA accident rate.
The myth is that cellphone use drastically increased the accident rate.
The fact is they had no effect whatsoever on the accident rate.
There are reasons for that fact; but you have to accept the fact first, before you can even begin to understand the effect of cellphones on
accident rates.
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
Get it done and implemented.
Please quote verbatim the person here who allegedly subscribes to such a myth. No one claims ANYTHING involving 'accident rates', you're the ONLY
one who keeps regurgitating the topic of accident rates continuously diverting the discussion to accident rates that no one beside you even mentions. Are you a cell-phone lobbyist by any chance tasked to disrupt
any thread threatening the zillions of dollars made by associated
hardware, software or datamining interests?
The fact is they had no effect whatsoever on the accident rate.
Their effect on accident rates is NOT known (yet).
It will maybe be
known after a decade or more of legislation forcing providers to track
and record all cell-phone traffic in moving cars and police to
cross-check, correlate if applicable and reference such database info
when writing every single accident report the world over.
There are reasons for that fact; but you have to accept the fact first,
before you can even begin to understand the effect of cellphones on
accident rates.
Accident stats including rates may include some but are NOT, never were
nor will ever be all the facts or the facts, not even close.
Believing that a cellphone is safer is just fooling yourself.
And yet, cellphones had absolutely no effect on the USA accident rate.
This is such a hearsay as the one that claims that old drivers cause the majority of car accidents and therefore their driver licenses should not be renewed above a certain age. Actually, the statistics show that yunger drivers cause the majority of accidents.
On 6/9/2024 3:52 PM, Java Jive wrote:
��� Let me see... How do I manage to look at a map? Oh, yeah,
I pull over. :)
Trying to be a smart arse just makes you look a jerk.� There are many,
many driving situations where you can't just pull over to the side of
the road.
� Just a bit of
humor. Prior to a few years ago, everyone
used maps. It worked.
I still use maps. If I can't pull over then
I wait until I can. Not rocket science. Believing that a cellphone
is safer is just fooling yourself.
� I've been in a car where people were using driving directions
exactly twice. One was Google. I think the other was a Mapquest
printout. Google told us to take a crazy route that would have
wasted an hour. It appeared sensible to a visitor, but as a local
I knew it would have been a disastrous choice.
�� Mapquest had the right route, but had the direction wrong.
It told us to take route x north when it should have been south.
Both trips would have been easy to plan via map before leaving
the house.
I don't mind if people can't read maps and want to use
Google or Mapquest, but if you really need to look at your cellphone,
you should pull over.
If you follow Google and then your passenger
squeals that the directions are wrong, don't panic. Don't make any
sudden move or veer into another lane. Don't slam on the brakes.
Keep driving until you have a chance to pull over safely and consult
a map. :)
�� And leave you with no excuse to have a self righteous
tantrum? I could never be so mean-spirited. :)
You live in your Luddite world if you wish, but don't, as you did at the start of this subthread, imperiously rant at everyone else for moving
with the times and overtaking you.
On 6/9/2024 12:20 AM, Klyde wrote:
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some
news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
State Farm has filed a patent for a system that suppresses calls and
notifications to a driver's phone while they are operating a motor
vehicle, according to patent documents recently published by the
United States Patent and Trademark Office.
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-f
or-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving/
Get it done and implemented.
We see prople driving along holding cell phones up to their face and
watching videos or having animated conversations.
There was a repeat violator negro with no drivers license on a zoom call
court appearance with a judge while he was driving.
These people need to be stopped, pulled from their vehicles and beaten
sufficiently to put them in the hospital for 30 days at their expense.
The only calls that should be permitted from a moving vehicle are
emergency calls.
What conceivable reason would cause you to stop passengers in a car from >using their phone, or the drivers phone?
On 6/9/24 03:20, Klyde wrote:
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some
news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
Get it done and implemented.
On re-reading the article I think insurance might be an inappropriate jurisdiction. Legislation could force cell providers to continuously
monitor cell traffic in moving phones, isolate those in cars belonging
to the owner etc. and automatically transfer data to police who could
then also autamatically issue the official Darwin award. This may sound complex but is actually perfect AI turf producing resolutions in milliseconds. All you need is large fines and three strikes to lose
license. It's doable, so is a mandatory self-disabling feature in phones
that senses running engines in proximity and doppler closure-rates
regardless of whether the phone is in a car or in the hands of some
walking zika-barbie. Thousands of applications become possible all of
them a walk in the park for AI; for example electronically tagged
crosswalks that cause all cellphones within XYZ feet to shut up.
On 6/10/2024 7:21 AM, bad sector wrote:
On 6/9/24 03:20, Klyde wrote:
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some
news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
Get it done and implemented.
On re-reading the article I think insurance might be an inappropriate
jurisdiction. Legislation could force cell providers to continuously
monitor cell traffic in moving phones, isolate those in cars belonging
to the owner etc. and automatically transfer data to police who could
then also autamatically issue the official Darwin award. This may
sound complex but is actually perfect AI turf producing resolutions in
milliseconds. All you need is large fines and three strikes to lose
license. It's doable, so is a mandatory self-disabling feature in
phones that senses running engines in proximity and doppler
closure-rates regardless of whether the phone is in a car or in the
hands of some walking zika-barbie. Thousands of applications become
possible all of them a walk in the park for AI; for example
electronically tagged crosswalks that cause all cellphones within XYZ
feet to shut up.
Are you familiar with "burner phone"?
There's no way to discuss facts with you when your entire belief system is based on zero facts - which is why you strongly believe in a baseless myth.
...I'm a fan of freedoms and liberties but when it comes to guns and
motor vehicles then fences must protect society from those lunatics
who are or used to be institutionalised in other countries. For guns
yearly, for cars maybe every five years a mandatory psy. eval. to
begin with.
In my burg (metro area of the 5th largest city in the US) when some
drivers get pissed off they just start shooting at the perceived
offender. It's called road rage. I try not to piss anyone off...
State Farm is already trying to get its clients to use a "beacon" that
will record their driving info, and if they go slow enough, etc. they
get a premium dscount. This is probably not the primary page to learn
about it but otoh it probably gets to a lot of points the primary page
does not. Search for the word beacon. >https://www.statefarm.com/customer-care/faqs/drive-safe-save#accordion-59ab055521-item-46148a721a
For me the prerequisite facts are in the form of two incidents (cited earlier) involving in one case my own and in another someone else's use
of a cell phone in a car. I do not need any others. Youtube is full of
videos of people stepping into swimming pools or into traffic while on
the phone, if you need more than that then I can be of no further
assistance to you.
My opinion of the issue was appended as a sig before, I'll repeat it
here not as a sig because some people prefer to block sigs as is their
right. That's my take on it, take it or leave it; no like, no read.
All species of mobile phones, media devices, Bluetooth or not, and
onboard presentation systems beyond what is essential for vehicle
control should automatically disable themselves within 10 meters of any vehicle in motion at any speed. Hands-Free does NOT mean Brain-Free. In
the case of approaching vehicles (pedestrian use included) that distance should be multiplied (prorated) for every 5 km/h of CLOSURE speed (i.e.
no such device should be operable within 200 meters of any vehicle approaching at 100 km/h). Manufacturers of devices in which such an
automatic lockout feature is missing or can be disabled should first pay large fines and then be barred from the jurisdiction market. With
respect to other road-hog conduct, in addition to intoxication or attention-diverting use of lethal-technology while driving,
brake-checking and tailgating should also be HANGING crimes. Any irresponsible vehicle handling should in fact be punished exactly as it
would be in the case of irresponsible weapons handling (which ALSO needs
to be beefed up).
I have State Farm and they solicited me a couple of times with the
discount and this says maybe 30%:
https://www.statefarm.com/customer-care/download-mobile-apps/drive-safe-and-save-mobile
I would not even do it for even a larger discount for them to see when I exceeded the speed limit or maybe even farted while driving the car.
On 6/9/2024 10:43 AM, Bob F wrote:
On 6/9/2024 12:20 AM, Klyde wrote:
On 23 Apr 2024, JAB <[email protected]d> posted some
news:v08acm$1kbd2$[email protected]:
State Farm files patent for system to suppress calls and text while
driving
State Farm has filed a patent for a system that suppresses calls and
notifications to a driver's phone while they are operating a motor
vehicle, according to patent documents recently published by the
United States Patent and Trademark Office.
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/04/22/state-farm-files-patent-f >>>> or-system-to-suppress-calls-and-text-while-driving/
Get it done and implemented.
We see prople driving along holding cell phones up to their face and
watching videos or having animated conversations.
The only calls that should be permitted from a moving vehicle are
emergency calls.
What conceivable reason would cause you to stop passengers in a car
from using their phone, or the drivers phone?
I can see using it if they gave me a big discount on the premium. Doubt
it would ever be mandated.
OTOH, I'm told years ago people did not have phones in cars but that was
in ancient times.
bonus malus
In news:[email protected], bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> typed:
...I'm a fan of freedoms and liberties but when it comes to guns and
motor vehicles then fences must protect society from those lunatics
who are or used to be institutionalised in other countries. For guns
yearly, for cars maybe every five years a mandatory psy. eval. to
begin with.
How about voters? How about "journalists"? Surely these two categories present
more danger to society as a whole than gunowners or drivers.
bad sector wrote on Mon, 10 Jun 2024 09:38:45 -0400 :
For me the prerequisite facts are in the form of two incidents (cited
earlier) involving in one case my own and in another someone else's use
of a cell phone in a car. I do not need any others. Youtube is full of
videos of people stepping into swimming pools or into traffic while on
the phone, if you need more than that then I can be of no further
assistance to you.
My opinion of the issue was appended as a sig before, I'll repeat it
here not as a sig because some people prefer to block sigs as is their
right. That's my take on it, take it or leave it; no like, no read.
All species of mobile phones, media devices, Bluetooth or not, and
onboard presentation systems beyond what is essential for vehicle
control should automatically disable themselves within 10 meters of any
vehicle in motion at any speed. Hands-Free does NOT mean Brain-Free. In
the case of approaching vehicles (pedestrian use included) that distance
should be multiplied (prorated) for every 5 km/h of CLOSURE speed (i.e.
no such device should be operable within 200 meters of any vehicle
approaching at 100 km/h). Manufacturers of devices in which such an
automatic lockout feature is missing or can be disabled should first pay
large fines and then be barred from the jurisdiction market. With
respect to other road-hog conduct, in addition to intoxication or
attention-diverting use of lethal-technology while driving,
brake-checking and tailgating should also be HANGING crimes. Any
irresponsible vehicle handling should in fact be punished exactly as it
would be in the case of irresponsible weapons handling (which ALSO needs
to be beefed up).
I am fully aware of how myths work so you didn't need to explain why you believe in a biased myth that has no actual basis in reliable facts.
I presume by now that you've scoured the Internet for those facts and you have found absolutely nothing that supports your mythical point of view.
Otherwise you would have stated facts instead of fomenting mere myths.
In news:[email protected], bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> typed:
On 6/10/24 10:27, max headroom wrote:
In news:[email protected], bad sector
<forgetski@_INVALID.net> typed:
...I'm a fan of freedoms and liberties but when it comes to guns and
motor vehicles then fences must protect society from those lunatics
who are or used to be institutionalised in other countries. For guns
yearly, for cars maybe every five years a mandatory psy. eval. to
begin with.
How about voters? How about "journalists"? Surely these two
categories present more danger to society as a whole than gunowners
or drivers.
Many people have moved the idea that voting should be tied to sobriety
tests among many others, I can't say I could not agree....
I'd rather see a drunk who could pass the naturalization citizenship test vote
than a pinkie who believes that bigger = better applies to government.
... Journalists say what their bosses the media owners tell them to say ...
Nah, more likely their bosses only hire those who think "correctly."
I have State Farm and they solicited me a couple of times with the
discount and this says maybe 30%:
https://www.statefarm.com/customer-care/download-mobile-apps/drive-safe-and-save-mobile
I would not even do it for even a larger discount for them to see
when I exceeded the speed limit or maybe even farted while driving
the car.
On 6/10/24 10:27, max headroom wrote:
In news:[email protected], bad sector
<forgetski@_INVALID.net> typed:
...I'm a fan of freedoms and liberties but when it comes to guns and
motor vehicles then fences must protect society from those lunatics
who are or used to be institutionalised in other countries. For guns
yearly, for cars maybe every five years a mandatory psy. eval. to
begin with.
How about voters? How about "journalists"? Surely these two
categories present more danger to society as a whole than gunowners
or drivers.
Many people have moved the idea that voting should be tied to sobriety
tests among many others, I can't say I could not agree....
... Journalists say what their bosses the media owners tell them to say ...
On 6/10/24 15:47, max headroom wrote:
In news:[email protected], bad sector
<forgetski@_INVALID.net> typed:
On 6/10/24 10:27, max headroom wrote:
In news:[email protected], bad sector
<forgetski@_INVALID.net> typed:
...I'm a fan of freedoms and liberties but when it comes to guns and >>>>> motor vehicles then fences must protect society from those lunatics
who are or used to be institutionalised in other countries. For guns >>>>> yearly, for cars maybe every five years a mandatory psy. eval. to
begin with.
How about voters? How about "journalists"? Surely these two
categories present more danger to society as a whole than gunowners
or drivers.
Many people have moved the idea that voting should be tied to sobriety
tests among many others, I can't say I could not agree....
I'd rather see a drunk who could pass the naturalization citizenship
test vote
than a pinkie who believes that bigger = better applies to government.
I have no idea what the tests you refer to are or what they contain (I
can only presume that they would be the US exams) but maybe a Phd. in accounting and familiarity with interrogation techniques could also help.
... Journalists say what their bosses the media owners tell them to
say ...
Nah, more likely their bosses only hire those who think "correctly."
Same difference, if it isn't big money (owner) bias then it's the
mercentile nature of ad-revenue governing all that smells bad. If the
news isn't about the Virgin Mary stripping on a sidewalk then it isn't sensational and detail-free but outrageous superficiality enough. What's
the alternative, lavatory walls? I have no answer.
On Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:16:49 -0400, Frank wrote:
I have State Farm and they solicited me a couple of times with the
discount and this says maybe 30%:
https://www.statefarm.com/customer-care/download-mobile-apps/drive-safe-and-save-mobile
I would not even do it for even a larger discount for them to see when
I exceeded the speed limit or maybe even farted while driving the car.
I suspect the insurance companies want to have a new system of bonus malus
to squeeze even more money, almost like a taxation system, from its policy holders by using this method - which is like a subscription based penalty.
[Default] bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> typed:
Not intimately but if they are a problem you take them out, period. I'm
a fan of freedoms and liberties but when it comes to guns and motor
vehicles then fences must protect society from those lunatics who are or
used to be institutionalised in other countries. For guns yearly, for
cars maybe every five years a mandatory psy. eval. to begin with.
TRANSLATION: "I'm a fan of freedoms and liberties for me."
Ed P wrote:
I'm told years ago people did not have phones in cars
https://youtu.be/Y_uRAp5q07M?t=114
I myself almost ran some construction workers over BECAUSE I was on the phone, that's a fact but there was no accident, no report and no
statistics. I know that because I am a defensive driver; defensive
driving isn't based on facts or on statisrucs or on increaeses in
accident rates, it's based on suspicion, paranoia and prejuducial
treatment of all road situations. I trust my instincts, over a million
miles without accidents, argue with THAT.
On 6/9/24 13:34, Loran wrote:
Ed P wrote:
I'm told years ago people did not have phones in cars
https://youtu.be/Y_uRAp5q07M?t=114
Some cars did come with record players. IIRC, that's where the brand
name "Motorola" came from.
On 6/9/24 13:34, Loran wrote:
Ed P wrote:
I'm told years ago people did not have phones in cars
https://youtu.be/Y_uRAp5q07M?t=114
Some cars did come with record players. IIRC, that's where the brand
name "Motorola" came from.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 165:37:02 |
| Calls: | 12,096 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 15,001 |
| Messages: | 6,517,806 |