decot@cwruecmp.UUCP (Dave Decot) (01/19/84)
Laura Creighton brought up (in net.religion, as an aside) a concept that I have, thought would be useful for significantly decreasing the incidence of driving vehicles by persons whose vision or psychomotor coordination is not sufficient to do so safely. The concept is a device, to be installed in one's vehicle, so that the vehicle cannot be started without first correctly entering a sequence of digits, which changes and is displayed before each attempted ignition. Although I can think of several problems with this kind of system, both philosophical and practical, generally it seems to be a good idea. Some of the problems: 1) They must be required by law, inspected for presence and correct operation periodically, and made easy to use by ANY competent driver, or drivers will not use them. Expense is probably not a major issue, because technology is cheap. 2) "Clever" owners will find ways to secretly disconnect them for use and reconnect them for inspection. 3) Persons, particularly Americans, will resent such a law as an infringement on their right to travel freely. 4) Well-intentioned friends may "aid" the actual driver by performing the task for him. 5) Such a task may not be complex enough for people experienced with the device, and can be be performed "automatically." (But, I suppose, so can safe driving behavior.) I think somebody has already tried doing this type of thing, but I don't remember hearing what finally happened. Ideas? Comments? Info? Dave Decot decvax!cwruecmp!decot (Decot.Case@rand-relay)
marla@ssc-vax.UUCP (Marla S Baer) (02/02/84)
[] I have heard about this and other similar systems being tried/tested. One problem kept cropping up. What happens in an emergency, when someone is not thinking perfectly, ie. they are being attacked (actually happened) and can't get their car to start fast enough to get away. This incident happened over a seat belt test-the car would not start unless the seatbelt was fastened. A woman was injured (I don't remember how badly) because she couldn't get the belt fastened so she could get away from the gang that was harassing her. A complicated start up arrangement could prove to be even more hazardous. Just something to think about. Marla S. Baer ssc-vax!marla
jcz@ncsu.UUCP (John Carl Zeigler) (02/06/84)
The idea of a gadget that tests for coordination
is not new. I remember seeing films of such a thing
many years ago. The basic idea is to present the driver
with some sort of task that he could not do if drunk,
and which he must do to start the car.
The biggest problem I have with this idea is that
it presumes guilt. I must prove my innocence before I
can move my car. And what happens if the device breaks??
There I would be, stuck with my car flashing "syntax error"
at me. How about some sort of device that compares
driving performance with a running record and starts flashing
a light on the back of the car if the driver is driving in
an impaired manner?
John Carl Zeigler
The SAS Intitute Inc.
Cary NC, (919) 467 8000
mcnc!ncsu!jczsew@minn-ua.UUCP (02/06/84)
#R:haring:-18000:minn-ua:10400001:000:184 minn-ua!sew Feb 6 11:19:00 1984 <> Several years ago a similar drunkeness tester was reported. That unit did allow the car to be moved without passing the test...with a maximum speed of 15 MPH and lights flashing.
fish@ihu1g.UUCP (Bob Fishell) (02/09/84)
(oo)
This reminds me of the seatbelt interlock, one of the worst technological
snafus the auto industry ever produced. I don't condone drunk driving,
but I don't think technology is an answer to the problem. All you'd have
to do is pay some kid a couple of bucks to start the car, anyway, and
there goes your protection.
Neither do I believe that stricter law enforcement and stiffer penalties are
going to solve the problem. What is needed is a good hard look at why
people drink so much, and how to solve THAT problem. And, of course,
a good public transportation system might help. A drunk on a train or
a bus isn't likely to do much damage.
--
Bob Fishell
ihnp4!ihu1g!fishjaap@haring.UUCP (02/10/84)
<How will you know you've fixed you software if you don't see this?> Hm. I remember an article in some journal a couple of years ago, describing Laura Creighton's anti-drugged or anti-abent minded driving device. The idea was that it would disconnect the electric system for 8 hours if you failed to do a certain test after 3 times. The device had succesfully made in Japan, and during that time there were ideas to make it obligatory to have it in cars around, sealed all over, to prevent sabotage. Rats, beaten again by Japanese technology, the Fifth generation car! Jaap Akkerhuis.