Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Police detectors to warn mobile phone-using drivers

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 49 posts

Re: Police detectors to warn mobile phone-using drivers

#11

Post by DanBC »

devoply wrote: post #9
TheGrumpyBrit wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't really have probably cause in that sense in the UK. Any driver can be stopped at any time purely to check documents if required - police don't need to have a reason.

Probable cause is used to search the car. Police can't randomly search cars. However in order to target areas with minorities who are involved with drugs, they use police dogs that can supposedly sniff drugs. But the dogs really just read their handlers and bark when their handlers want them to. Police can stop anyone at any time for documents. /papers please Recently in Canada a driver was charged for distracted dri…

That's not true in the UK.

Police can use reasonable grounds to search and they don't need a dog to alert to give them those reasonable grounds.

The dogs, if used, in the UK probably are sniffing actual drugs.

Here's some legal information: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/scotland/law-and-courts/le...

Re: Police detectors to warn mobile phone-using drivers

#12

Post by m0nty »

stephen_g wrote: post #5

This seems like a silly idea - as the article says, there's no way for it to tell whether it's the driver or a passenger, but even if there's only one person in the car, there's no way to tell if the person is actively using a mobile phone or if it's just sitting in the car and there's some app running on it that happens to be transmitting data... Then add in the likelihood that it'll pick up all sorts of random inte…

I don't think it's silly, more of an extended field test which might cause some people to put their phones away. Everyone involved is probably thinking it's of marginal benefit at the moment, but the field-test data can be used to develop the tech. Seems perfectly reasonable.

The alternative would be to go "big bang" on a half-baked technology which would repeatedly fail to secure convictions. That would be silly.

Re: Police detectors to warn mobile phone-using drivers

#13

Post by lozenge »

mintone wrote: post #2

The article suggests that the detectors will detect 2G, 3G and 4G usage, but will recognise if a bluetooth hands-free kit is in use. This sounds like complete snake oil to me, please could someone explain if this is possible?

It would probably fall foul of hacking laws even if technically possible (which it isn't). They just don't want to say it is a camera based system for fear of... vandalism?

An image classifier with a human check doling out fixed penalties would be more effective than this. So would a warning system on phones that shamed drivers. Neither are within the resources of the police to develop (as nearly all police in the UK are local).

Re: Police detectors to warn mobile phone-using drivers

#15

Post by devoply »

DanBC wrote: post #11
devoply wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probable cause is used to search the car. Police can't randomly search cars. However in order to target areas with minorities who are involved with drugs, they use police dogs that can supposedly sniff drugs. But the dogs really just read their handlers and bark when their handlers want them to. Police can stop anyone at any time for documents. /papers please Recently in Canada a driver was charged for distracted dri…

That's not true in the UK. Police can use reasonable grounds to search and they don't need a dog to alert to give them those reasonable grounds. The dogs, if used, in the UK probably are sniffing actual drugs. Here's some legal information: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/scotland/law-and-courts/le...

It looks like it's true.

> You can also be searched if the police have reasonable grounds to suspect you have: > illegal drugs

Use a dog. Pretend it's reasonable grounds.

> In all situations, you can’t be searched just because of how you look or who you are, as this is discrimination.

Yes it is and that's how you use a dog to discriminate and maintain the legal fiction.

Re: Police detectors to warn mobile phone-using drivers

#16

Post by tinus_hn »

justinjlynn wrote: post #3
mintone wrote: post #2

The article suggests that the detectors will detect 2G, 3G and 4G usage, but will recognise if a bluetooth hands-free kit is in use. This sounds like complete snake oil to me, please could someone explain if this is possible?

I would be amazed if this were reliable enough to survive legal challenge. Personally, it sounds too much like the old "TV detector vans". I'm skeptical.

If you read the article, it says it gives warnings, not fines. It can’t tell if a phone is used by the driver or a passenger anyway.

Re: Police detectors to warn mobile phone-using drivers

#17

Post by ehnto »

stephen_g wrote: post #5

This seems like a silly idea - as the article says, there's no way for it to tell whether it's the driver or a passenger, but even if there's only one person in the car, there's no way to tell if the person is actively using a mobile phone or if it's just sitting in the car and there's some app running on it that happens to be transmitting data... Then add in the likelihood that it'll pick up all sorts of random inte…

Considering the failure mode is fatal, it's not that unreasonable to expect people to turn off their phones in their cars in my opinion.

If you are driving, you can't respond anyway, so just wait until you get to your destination to reconnect.

Phone use is now killing more people than drunk driving so I don't feel like it's an over-reaction. Drivers had their chance to be responsible and they killed a bunch of people instead.

Re: Police detectors to warn mobile phone-using drivers

#18

Post by narrowtux »

mintone wrote: post #2

The article suggests that the detectors will detect 2G, 3G and 4G usage, but will recognise if a bluetooth hands-free kit is in use. This sounds like complete snake oil to me, please could someone explain if this is possible?

And what if you're using your phone for navigation? It will still transmit data to google maps or whichever maps service you use, but its usage would probably considered legal.

Re: Police detectors to warn mobile phone-using drivers

#19

Post by bestnameever »

mintone wrote: post #2

The article suggests that the detectors will detect 2G, 3G and 4G usage, but will recognise if a bluetooth hands-free kit is in use. This sounds like complete snake oil to me, please could someone explain if this is possible?

Really a guess - an uneducated one at that but I'm guessing it is measuring rf signals transmitting out of the phone more so vs what is being received which is why it will also notify if someone is talking on the phone - the phone will be transmitting. There is probably a measurable difference in rf when a phone is trying to send data vs just acting as a receiver, right? From what I can recall, it generally takes more power for a phone to send data to the tower than to receive it. At the same time, you can measure whether Bluetooth is simultaneously being used.

Re: Police detectors to warn mobile phone-using drivers

#20

Post by kurtisc »

ehnto wrote: post #17
stephen_g wrote: post #5

This seems like a silly idea - as the article says, there's no way for it to tell whether it's the driver or a passenger, but even if there's only one person in the car, there's no way to tell if the person is actively using a mobile phone or if it's just sitting in the car and there's some app running on it that happens to be transmitting data... Then add in the likelihood that it'll pick up all sorts of random inte…

Considering the failure mode is fatal, it's not that unreasonable to expect people to turn off their phones in their cars in my opinion. If you are driving, you can't respond anyway, so just wait until you get to your destination to reconnect. Phone use is now killing more people than drunk driving so I don't feel like it's an over-reaction. Drivers had their chance to be responsible and they killed a bunch of people…

Phones have legitimate uses in cars. Satnav, music, or even just an indication that you just pull over and answer a phone. Given that I've never used one illegally, I think it's fair for me not to want to go through a power cycle for every journey.

How could Uber work without one?

Post reply on HN