These technologies (including actual breathlyzer) are patches that might reduce bad human driving behavior but will never eliminate it. In my opinion the only way to solve this is to stop humans from driving altogether. The biggest reason I'm excited that self driving car technology is maturing is because I won't need to worry (and often see through windshield) that a fellow driver is pressing gas pedal while paying no attention where he/she 's going.
New York eyes a 'breathlyzer' for texting while driving
11–20 of 51 posts
Re: New York eyes a 'breathlyzer' for texting while driving
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
On one hand, driving isn't a right and if you're piloting a 5k+ lb projectile at 70mph(or 50k+ in the case of some truckers I've seen texting + driving) you deserve to have the goddamn book thrown at you. It would be nicer if there was a way to do this without complete privacy invasion, at the bare minimum a warrant + request to your carrier for just timestamp metadata would make me much more comfortable.
What if my passenger was making the call or text on my phone (which isn't uncommon, at least with my group of friends)? What if the texts were minutes before at a parking lot, while the car was off? How does anything but a copy actually seeing a cell phone in my hand while driving prove beyond a doubt I'm guilty?
E911 pings should provide moving speed at the time of the text. An officer is going to take your Driver's License, so they should should be able to differentiate between you and your passengers.
Re: New York eyes a 'breathlyzer' for texting while driving
#13this seems to be unconstitutional on its face, but the courts have been willing to let cops get away with murder, so it probably would end up being allowed.
Re: New York eyes a 'breathlyzer' for texting while driving
#14This will be struck down by the courts so fast the ink won't even be dry. Your phone is the backbone of your life and contains pretty much all of your private information and allowing police to scoop all of that up without a warrant is blatantly unconstitutional.
So we might hope. But I worry that when this reaches the courts, the case will be over a collision where the driver at fault has modified their phone to resist such an intrusion...
Re: New York eyes a 'breathlyzer' for texting while driving
#15This will be struck down by the courts so fast the ink won't even be dry. Your phone is the backbone of your life and contains pretty much all of your private information and allowing police to scoop all of that up without a warrant is blatantly unconstitutional.
This might fall under probable cause justifying a search.
For example, in a traffic collision, you tailend someone: a super common cause is distracted driving. The officer might claim a search for concrete evidence of distracted driving, like if you were accessing the phone during that moment.
Re: New York eyes a 'breathlyzer' for texting while driving
#16How soon before Apple and Google patch whatever mechanisms this tool is using to check phone activity?
Since my phone uses Qi charging, maybe I see a value in epoxying my USB port...
Re: New York eyes a 'breathlyzer' for texting while driving
#17This is a horrible idea.
I'm not going to unlock my phone for the cops just because they pull me over. Once they connect, who knows what data they will capture and how that will be used. Driving isn't probable case for them to look through my emails... and once I unlock my phone for them they can see everything.
Also... it's stupidly easy to circumvent. Just carry an old phone and switch it out when they ask. They won't have probable cause to search the car, so it's really whatever phone you give them.
I hate how they waste tax money on crap like this.
Re: New York eyes a 'breathlyzer' for texting while driving
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if my passenger was making the call or text on my phone (which isn't uncommon, at least with my group of friends)? What if the texts were minutes before at a parking lot, while the car was off? How does anything but a copy actually seeing a cell phone in my hand while driving prove beyond a doubt I'm guilty?
E911 pings should provide moving speed at the time of the text. An officer is going to take your Driver's License, so they should should be able to differentiate between you and your passengers.
How accurate are E911 pings?
What if I give my phone to a passenger? My driver's license has literally nothing to do with that.
My wife and I both have expensive smart phones. We frequently let the passenger use the driver's phone for, e.g. navigational purposes. If we get in an accident while I'm driving and my wife is using my phone to configure a route, how is a cop to know that?
Re: New York eyes a 'breathlyzer' for texting while driving
#19This article was really light on technological details:
>The technology is still in development. But the concept is a device that would use cutting-edge software to determine whether a person's smartphone was being used at the time of an accident.
Does anyone know anything about what Cellebrite does? Their website feels jargon-y on the surface, didn't get a clear sense of what all they do on an initial visit. Is what they're proposing even possible without help from Apple/Google?
Re: New York eyes a 'breathlyzer' for texting while driving
#20Anyone know where I can get one of these devices that can bypass the security of a smartphone and scrape it's contents? Also, will the mobile OS manufacturers be patching this gaping security hole?