New Restrictive Technology = Fail

I'm usually a fan of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, but an article Thursday on TheHill.com merited a face-palm type of reaction. The article was about the dangers of driving while texting. I believe it is currently illegal in California to text while driving (though I must admit to frequently disregarding the law in this regard). California is generally ahead of the curve on this kind of legislation, and we need only to look out the window on the 10 Freeway to see having the legislation on the books and in people's minds is not enough to enforce this rule.

First of all, not everyone has a Bluetooth stereo in their car or a speakerphone function on their mobile. Though this segment is limited, some people simply have no means to use a mobile device in a hands-free capacity. More importantly, though, does anyone reading this actually know what hands-free means? Does that mean I can dial a number and let the car take over, dial and then navigate multiple menus to put on speakerphone, or can I not dial the number at all, but rather have to use some kind of voice command to call a friend. I certainly don't know, and have relatively little interest in finding out. Having learned to drive while using a cellular phone, it is a luxury I am simply not willing to give up. Back to the chairman, the article mentioned some ways to forcibly prevent people from driving and texting. He proposed some ideas, the most frivolous of which was, “There may also be opportunities to use RFID-sensor technology in keychains that would disable selected functions on a driver's device activated by the start up of their car.”

This reminds me of two things: 1) the forced speed caps in cars that Ford has proposed multiple times over the year, and 2) the breathalyzers put in cars of those who have been convicted of a DUI that must be blown in to start the car. The Ford idea has been scrapped again and again because people simply hate the idea. The only people who that really appeals to are overzealous parents who want to ensure their teen-driver's safety. The breathalyzer is somewhat more justified, but for most is simply an annoyance rather than a preventative tool. Especially as phones are becoming more advanced (and open-source, a la Android and WebOS), something like this is simply going to annoy people, rather than make them safer drivers.

A passionate comment about the article came from the operator of ZoomSafer. Obviously this person is coming at the issue with a slight bias, but they are strong advocates for stricter enforcement of these laws. Even they admit that “States such as California that currently prohibit handset use are having difficulty breaking people of their distracted driving habits, as recent photos of First Lady Maria Shriver using her cell phone while driving show.” I have written about this before, but forcing people to be limited with new technology will never be welcome and will always be overcome by someone.