Apple sued for not implementing iPhone lock-out feature to discourage texting and driving
- Thread starter Shawn Knight
- Start date
Kibaruk
Posts: 3,836 +1,189
It's not about people not wanting to be responsible anymore, that being the case the one who rear ended would've sued apple, in this case the dude is trying to build a case for them to force it on the irresponsible people, to which I agree to a certain degree, maybe not through a court but you know, they won't make anything out of their good hearts.
I'll quote myself just in case...
This can save lives, stupid texting and driving kills more than drunk driving.
Again, it's not a matter of shifting responsibilities, but if there is a way to make it safer for everyone, I'm all in for that so should the manufacturers and the authorities and it's my firm belief that anyone who thinks differently should...
Squid Surprise
Posts: 5,596 +5,227
Except it WON'T save lives... because people will still drive while being distracted... they'll just find something else to be distracted by... I remember when cars first had GPS' installed in them - everyone was like, "now people won't be distracted while entering their nav info into their personal GPS device because the car will automatically lock it while driving"...
Well, how's that working out
When the problem is human nature, a solution isn't going to be "just take the distraction away"... As the article said, the only REAL solution is self-driving cars... until then, EDUCATION is really the only answer... it won't work, but it WILL help eventually... there ARE less drinking and driving incidents now as opposed to decades ago....
But just as making alcohol illegal didn't stop people from getting drunk, locking someone's phone in the car won't stop them from being distracted drivers
I disagree. The problem is we're not punishing or eliminating stupid. My suggestion is that every police offficer get -3- free no paperwork kills. Forensics can show up and decide if the police officer was justified and the system punishes them if they abused their authority. DWI is one of those freebies. The drivers blows .15 or some number two+ drinks in and the police officer can waste them right there. Forensics does the blood tests, etc. and if they are, police officer gets one of his/her free 3 back.
Same thing with texting. Police officer on the spot of the accident has the authority to get the date/time stamps of the last texts from just before the accident. No garbage about privacy or content, date/time will do fine. Date/time shows the driver was texting at the time of the accident, police officer shoots them, preferably dead. If not dead, the texter is not allowed to sue, anyone, ever again. No appeals. No reversals. Computer forensics shows the police officer was correct, they get one of their 3 no paperwork kills back.
It won't take long to get around.
First thing someone will try to do is invent a way for the date/time to be hidden when that happens. In that type of case, computer forensics will eventually find out the truth and the texting driver is shot when the forensics is accepted by a judge. Judge doesn't have to say whether it will win at trial. Just that the forensics are correctly applied.
In a short time, even stupid learns that it can be hurt worse and they won't vote or breed anymore.
Oh..there's always someone complaining about police officers abusing their authority and killing someone for no reason. To prevent that situation, the police officer gets paid a bonus each month and 50,000 dollars for each unused kill at retirement.
Same thing with texting. Police officer on the spot of the accident has the authority to get the date/time stamps of the last texts from just before the accident. No garbage about privacy or content, date/time will do fine. Date/time shows the driver was texting at the time of the accident, police officer shoots them, preferably dead. If not dead, the texter is not allowed to sue, anyone, ever again. No appeals. No reversals. Computer forensics shows the police officer was correct, they get one of their 3 no paperwork kills back.
It won't take long to get around.
First thing someone will try to do is invent a way for the date/time to be hidden when that happens. In that type of case, computer forensics will eventually find out the truth and the texting driver is shot when the forensics is accepted by a judge. Judge doesn't have to say whether it will win at trial. Just that the forensics are correctly applied.
In a short time, even stupid learns that it can be hurt worse and they won't vote or breed anymore.
Oh..there's always someone complaining about police officers abusing their authority and killing someone for no reason. To prevent that situation, the police officer gets paid a bonus each month and 50,000 dollars for each unused kill at retirement.
Lmao, I love it!
M
MikeSmithFL
Another real solution would have been punishing the perpetrators of this kind of crime all along. If the young lady that created the distraction she put herself in had known of a history of increasingly severe punishment for that kind of criminal activity, even the stupid would decide to leave the phone out of reach. Instead of suing Apple, this guy should be suing the court system in California for allowing that kind of activity to reach such a dangerous level by not enforcing the existing laws. But, no, it's just like drunk driving laws not being effectively enforced because at some point the judge considers that he or she might just be on the other side of the bench.
Kibaruk
Posts: 3,836 +1,189
Yeah, because crime rates are so much lower where they have death penalty against those who don't...
It's not a matter of punishing or ask the speeders, they will keep on doing it, the same with drunk drivers. The only way to solve this is by forcing a system that will lock out the users from their phones while on the car and this is something that can be done if the authorities + car and phone manufacturers work together.
jaxonian
Posts: 11 +1
Author should be sued for presenting an opinion piece as a news piece. Write the news and keep your fanboy opinions to yourself. Or write a blog about it and call it a blog. I personally have no problem with this guy suing to get Apple's attention. How else would he get it? If you're honest, you'll realize there's no other way. These huge companies never do anything to protect their users unless they're forced to do it. Most smartphones are fully capable of deploying this simple technology. Mine can turn it's WiFi radio on when I arrive at a specific location and off when I leave, so it would be easy to write the software to turn texting and voice comms off while moving above a specific speed. It isn't that something has to be invented. Companies just have to be made to care enough to connect the dots and do it. Too many people commenting here don't get that people are dying over this issue. Is the death toll worse than from drunk drivers? I don't know. Do you?
Squid Surprise
Posts: 5,596 +5,227
The point is (which you've pointedly ignored), WHY IS APPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU DO WITH YOUR PHONE!!!
They sold you an iphone... YOU chose to text and drive and hit someone else... that's NOT Apple's fault... that's YOUR fault!! Don't sue Apple.. Don't sue Toyota (or Ford, or whatever car you own)... YOU should be sued for being stupid...
If someone makes a really nice hammer - it's meant to hit nails... you decide to hit your friend over the head with it.... should the hammer company be sued?? NO!! YOU should be sued (and put in jail) for being the id1ot who used the hammer to hit someone!
Kibaruk
Posts: 3,836 +1,189
It stopped being about the lawsuit a long time ago, so stop focusing on that, it's about forcing -like you said- stupid people so they don't do stupid things that actually KILLS -and sadly- not the stupid people, but the ones that only were on the path.
Maybe not through a lawsuit, again, and I repeat myself because I've done so far on at least 2-3 posts, but it's definitely something that authorities should actively be working with the manufacturers, just as they do with campaigns to avoid drunk driving and so on, it's a public issue and should be taken seriously. It's good that maybe through an infamous way it caught a bit of draft.
Squid Surprise
Posts: 5,596 +5,227
So you want to FORCE people not to be stupid? Good luck with that.... as I (and others) posted in a previous post, the only real answer is to make self-driving cars...
What needs to happen (and has kind of already begun), is REAL education on how to responsibly use smartphones - much like the ad campaigns that began years ago against Drunk Driving... it won't eliminate it, but over time, it will diminish incidents...
Unfortunately, education takes time... generations sometimes... and with technology leaping forward so quickly, by the time we are educated to use these devices, there will be 10 new ones that we can abuse with our stupidity...
Same goes with "forcing" us not to be stupid... by the time this "force" is in effect, there will be something else we will be abusing...
wiyosaya
Posts: 9,760 +9,644
crApple has the technology to prevent the stupidity.
Consider, for instance, that bars can be sued for giving too much to drink to anyone who then goes out and gets into a vehicle, drives, gets into an accident, and kills someone. http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...I-sue-bar-after-alcohol-related-accident.html People have been killed by distracted drivers. It is called enabling behavior. An icrapPhone has the capability built-in to text just like alcohol has the built-in ability to make people drunk. And yes, I know, there are bars that either can't tell or don't care when a person has had too much to drink and, thus, continue to give their customers more to drink.
Then again, perhaps what crApple should do instead is prevent users from texting via the keyboard and just let Siri read incoming texts and allow Siri to text back by voice control at times like this when the phone, through the use of GPS, can tell that is it moving faster than walking speed.
Squid Surprise
Posts: 5,596 +5,227
First of all... they DON'T have the technology to stop people from being stupid.... If I want to use my phone while driving, turning off bluetooth will do the trick, no matter what Apple does... and there are millions and millions of smartphones out there - most of which aren't made by apple - that will "enable" you to be stupid as well...
"Force" just isn't a viable option...
If we are to sue manufacturers because people are too stupid to use their product responsibly, shouldn't we start with gun manufacturers? Or cars themselves? This is people just shifting blame away from the real cause of all issues... people.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kibaruk
Posts: 3,836 +1,189
Again... for the ducking 5th time, it's not about suing, it's about authorities doing their ducking job. Oh wise one, please do tell me your solution for texting and driving, I'm all ears.
cliffordcooley
Posts: 13,141 +6,441
Texting privilege revoked for 6 months if caught texting and driving. They seem to care more for texting than driving so hit them where it hurts most.
Kibaruk
Posts: 3,836 +1,189
Sure, that sounds like a real solution for a unreal problem.
Squid Surprise
Posts: 5,596 +5,227
There IS no "easy" solution.... When it comes to stupidity, there is no cure... but holding the manufacturer of something responsible for how it is used only works if the item in question only has 1 purpose...
I could understand someone suing a gun manufacturer - the gun only had one purpose... to shoot something.... so when something or someone gets shot, there might be legal recourse...
But I would find it hard to believe that someone can say that the purpose of a smartphone is to text while driving.... it simply enables you to text/call someone wherever there is cell service (or WiFi I suppose)... If you're dumb enough to use it while doing something dangerous like driving - you're own fault!
If I buy a camera - and decide to use it on the top of a mountain (I want to take a picture of the view)... but I trip and fall off the mountain because I was "distracted" by the view from the camera.... can I sue the camera maker for making me fall?? And if I die - can my spouse sue instead? Certainly hope the answer is "no"....
I could understand someone suing a gun manufacturer - the gun only had one purpose... to shoot something.... so when something or someone gets shot, there might be legal recourse...
But I would find it hard to believe that someone can say that the purpose of a smartphone is to text while driving.... it simply enables you to text/call someone wherever there is cell service (or WiFi I suppose)... If you're dumb enough to use it while doing something dangerous like driving - you're own fault!
If I buy a camera - and decide to use it on the top of a mountain (I want to take a picture of the view)... but I trip and fall off the mountain because I was "distracted" by the view from the camera.... can I sue the camera maker for making me fall?? And if I die - can my spouse sue instead? Certainly hope the answer is "no"....
Kibaruk
Posts: 3,836 +1,189
Ok, let's focus on the gun example. What does the authorities do? They require permissions, and yata yata yata, but it's regulated (At least where I'm from, can't say for sure with all the stories in the US that you can go into a wallmart and get a gun...), it's not either about suing or making the phone manufacturers responsible for it BUT, it would be great for the authorities to make an alliance between car manufactures and phone manufactures to tackle the whole thing at once, and regulate it's usage in a car through whatever medium they see fit. That's it.
Squid Surprise
Posts: 5,596 +5,227
You missed my point as to why I mentioned guns.... Guns are an easier thing to enforce/legislate/etc... in the US, you are held back by your constitution that allows you all to (stupidly) own guns, but guns only have one purpose - to be shot at something. If you were to pass a law making a gun manufacturer responsible for the people shot by it, it might not be just, but at least it follows logically.
Smartphones, however, by their very nature are almost impossible to quantify... they do almost EVERYTHING!! And more and more things every year as more functionality is added in every new model. Can Apple reasonably be held responsible for each and every misuse of a device such as this? If I make a call on my iphone and talk someone into committing suicide - is Apple to blame?
If I play my music from my iPhone too loudly, and ruin someone's sleep - is Apple to blame?
If I take a compromising photo of someone with my iPhone.... get the picture?
Forcing Apple and Auto-manufacturers to cooperate on disabling texting while driving - even if possible (it isn't - just disable Bluetooth), doesn't solve the underlying problem --> lots of people are just plain DUMB, and will misuse ANYTHING if given the opportunity.
As long as guns exist, people will get shot... as long as smartphones exist, people will do stupid things with them...
Therefore, the only answer is to make the really harmful things impossible... which isn't possible.... failing this, we can educate people on how not to do these things....
Education, as I said before however, is a lot harder, costlier and takes more time.... but it DOES help....
Kibaruk
Posts: 3,836 +1,189
It seems it's you who is simply not getting the point... it's not about shifting the blame, although I'm done it's like talking to a brick wall.
Squid Surprise
Posts: 5,596 +5,227
ok then... this wasn't just for you obviously... everyone else who argued was talking about shifting the blame.... the part of my explanation geared for YOU was about how it was actually IMPOSSIBLE to prevent someone to use an iPhone while driving... guess you missed that part...
captaincranky
Posts: 19,684 +8,825
This takes people refusing to take responsibility for their own actions to a whole new, and verily epic, level.
I think America is done for. It should be obvious to all concerned, that the intelligence has been completely bred out of Homo Sapiens, and it's time for the chimps and gorillas to take over.
Oh my brothers of the genera Pan and Gorilla, take arms against a sea of oppression. The humans of the world won't resist your rule.
When you armies arrive, they'll be greeted with open arms. At least as long as you allow them to keep their battery chargers under the terms of surrender
I think America is done for. It should be obvious to all concerned, that the intelligence has been completely bred out of Homo Sapiens, and it's time for the chimps and gorillas to take over.
Oh my brothers of the genera Pan and Gorilla, take arms against a sea of oppression. The humans of the world won't resist your rule.
When you armies arrive, they'll be greeted with open arms. At least as long as you allow them to keep their battery chargers under the terms of surrender
Kibaruk
Posts: 3,836 +1,189
But you don't know, I can think of simple things to do of course that has simple alternatives. Imagine how many things engineers that has full access to both the phone and the car can think of, NFC, a beam of sorts kind of wifi like, some low energy bluetooth-like alternative, who knows, they might. And yes, it's not about blame shifting but rather avoid getting into the issue altogether, imagine a breathalyser to turn on the car but less invasive. Imagine an NFC chip with which you can ignite the car with your phone, hell, I'm going crazy lets brainstorm lol.
But again, and now I get that you get it, it's not about suing or shifting blames, and I'm pretty sure the guy who made the lawsuit doesn't think about it either, he simply knows that people won't stop being people and the only way to avoid errors is to remove the human factor, we still are a -maybe not so- long way to reach fully autonomous driving cars, but there might be a device that could bring this tech into new vehicles/smartphones that will not maybe but WILL save lives avoiding distractions.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Nintendo DMCA lawyers shut down everything Mario on Garry's Mod- RudyBob replied
-
How Sam Altman became a billionaire without equity in OpenAI
- anastrophe replied
