[pcl]

A good question. From the article, one of the things the guidelines call for is that manufacturers "develop technology to identify when the devices are being used by a driver while driving. That would ensure the limits are placed on drivers and not other vehicle occupants."

I bet that if the handset manufacturers were to work with the car manufacturers, they could pretty easily locate the phone to a foot or so with minimal battery impact.

[raldi]

So not only will people still use apps while driving, now they'll do it while reaching their arm way out over the passenger seat.

[StephenConnell]

That's not a big change. Don't you already reach way down below the windows so other drivers and police can't see you are using your phone?

[sandworm101]

Really? Deploy location technology inside a car just to enforce a "driver mode"? A market that consistently rejects tech to enforce speed limits isn't going to accept technology to limit app use in cars. All it will take is one story of someone trapped inside a crashed/stuck car being unable to call for help, or unable to text for help, and nobody will dare to so disable phones.

I cannot wait to see that tech also be deployed to enforce "airplane mode 2.0" so a voice can break in to my music to inform me about the latest skymall deals.

[Klathmon]

That's overly hyperbolic. Nobody is saying the phone should be completely disabled, just that they should design things so you need to interact with them less. Voice control is a fantastic tool here IMO.

But also, would it be that crazy for them to disable these restrictions in the case of an accident? Like how current cars unlock doors, shut off the engine, and put on flashers in the case of an accident now.

[sandworm101]

Ah, so now we have location within the car, and accident detection. And we would need to detect accidents nearby so that drivers can call 9/11 without getting out their vehicles. This is too many layers of tech simply to stop people from doing something they already know is wrong. Spend all those development cycles on direct anti-drunk, anti-speeding and anti-crash tech.

It's also not all that hyperbolic. Similar tech has been deployed with GPS. During the early days of handhelds many shutdown at high ground speeds as to prevent them being used to guide aircraft. I forget what the speed was (200mph?) but it was well below the arms limitations (mach 2+ and/or 60,000feet).

[Klathmon]

Again, it's not like the phone will just shut down and not allow you to do anything, but will most likely have a "car UI" that is limited. The people coming up with these things tend to give them more than a few seconds of thought.

And how many times have you been affected by the GPS thing?

[lathiat]

This is actually very possible you'd be surprised. Find a keyless car system that also lets you start it such as in the Mitsubishi Evo X and test the range around doors and within the driver seat etc that it lets you start the car. Surprisingly accurate.

Key just outside the drivers door won't start and the boot won't open if it's basically where the tail light is etc. and that's 10 year old tech.

[dmoy]

What about the passenger seat though? My EE/physics is rusty, but inside vs outside of a giant metal cage might be easier than slightly to the right but still inside.

[mzw_mzw]

Perhaps they could also call for the manufacturers to "develop technology" to give every driver a pony, while they're at it. It's kind of infuriating to hear from someone who thinks you can just say "develop technology" and then anything will happen.

[tzs]

You seem to be assuming that the NHTSA has no idea how feasible such technology is, and so may be asking for something that is very hard or even impossible.

That's a quite questionable assumption. They almost certainly talked to automobile and smartphone industry experts while developing these guidelines, and know that there are several fairly easy ways to do what they are asking for.