Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Watch TV On Your Satnav

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the stupid-goes-right-to-the-bone dept.

Transportation 225

Barence writes "Satnav firm Mio is launching a device with an integrated TV tuner. The Mio Spirit range includes a digital television tuner that is intended to be used 'during breaks in the journey or at their final destination.' However, safety campaigners fear there's little to stop the television being used at the wheel. When the system is first turned on a warning message is displayed, telling the user not to watch television while driving. If this is ignored, a secondary warning message kicks in if the GPS chip detects the vehicle is moving at more than 5mph. But that's it!"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First post? (1)

RockoTDF (1042780) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435243)

I always thought that warning messages were more likely to get you killed in the 0.05s you spend pressing "ok" when you could have done the one thing you wanted to do.

Re:First post? (4, Interesting)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435329)

I always thought that warning messages were more likely to get you killed in the 0.05s you spend pressing "ok" when you could have done the one thing you wanted to do.

They'd be more effective to only let you use the TV in "radio mode", e.g. no video to distract you from the road.

I want a GPS that blanks out white (2, Funny)

Philip K Dickhead (906971) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436089)

and begins muttering rosaries, as the unit detects I'm hitting 90 mph.

Re:First post? (4, Informative)

lindseyp (988332) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436125)

I've been using TV-enabled satnavs here in Japan for many years. The law forces dealers to make the TV switch off when the car is moving.

However most 3rd party fitters will bypass this restriction, and it's fairly common to see asshats driving round with the TV fully on.

Re:First post? (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435483)

Indeed. My in-dash navigation system often pops up warnings telling me that the map information hasn't been verified for the area that I'm in... covering up the map in doing so.. requiring me to press OK on the touch screen or wait 30 seconds.. which is about 10x longer than it needs to be there.

Re:First post? (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435563)

Why don't they use an audio message instead? That's not only safer, but also sounds a lot more effective as a warning.

Re:First post? (3, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435579)

My guess would be because they're fucking morons.

Re:First post? (5, Funny)

azior (1302509) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435601)

Those poor morons...

Re:First post? (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436115)

Because it's pretty ineffective when you've got the music turned up?

I've pretty much disabled all voice functionality on my GPS because I can't hear it half the time anyway, and trying to reach my volume knob is almost as distracting as having to hit that "ok" buton.

Re:First post? (1)

davidphogan74 (623610) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436235)

They could add an orange border, or a banner at the bottom, or any number of options not requiring user interaction just as easily.

Re:First post? (5, Funny)

mcvos (645701) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436373)

Maybe they should do it as a HUD system, prjecting on the windscreen of the car.

And then, when they feel the need to warn you, your entire windscreen goes opaque with a giant warning message.

Re:First post? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28435813)

honestly, hasn't this reached its momentary max yet?
point being, as soon as audi, bmw, merc or jag include dvd players with screens in front AND back seats, the lesser companies will do this same and once this once innovative and now (essentially useless) stuff is fabricated in the lesser models "teh shiznit" has to come up with some newer stuff to stay "teh shiznit".

truth be told, my moms boyfriend had a bmw - I never knew which one - what I do know is it was a 3 litre tdi automatic luxury model. around 2004-5 it had an analog AND dvb-t tuner installed. the screen switched off, ie to GPS mode, automatically as soon as the car moved more than approx 5mph.

the real question isn't whether manufacturers will force a blank screen (or whatever), as soon as the car is moving, but whether there will be competition between safety standards.

again, I couldn't care less about americans or saudis dying in car crashes and thankfully I live in the EU, which will protect me from car crashes and censor my internet of child pornography.

but just because some random gps company includes dvbt in their package, does that make it newsworthy? either they'll abide to rules or not. and THAT might be newsworthy.

Re:First post? (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436255)

What if the passenger wants to change the route on the satnav?

Speed Interlock Override (3, Funny)

Brett Buck (811747) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435253)

Even the current GPS units/DVD players can easily be defeated. In most cases, all you need to do is ground one of the pins in the connector, and it always thinks you are parked. My brother has been playing Family Guy DVDs in his in-dash unit for years. The SAME Family Guy DVD.

          Brett

Re:Speed Interlock Override (1)

mambodog (1399313) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435551)

Is it the one with the guy watching Madagascar while driving his Hummer, who then merges without looking?

Re:Speed Interlock Override (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28435785)

RUMSFELD!

Re:Speed Interlock Override (2, Insightful)

Mike1024 (184871) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435611)

Even the current GPS units/DVD players can easily be defeated. In most cases, all you need to do is ground one of the pins in the connector, and it always thinks you are parked.

I've heard some people who want a GPS/DVD player with the GPS functions disabled take the even more nefarious route of just buying a DVD player :-)

Re:Speed Interlock Override (1)

sndtech (738958) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435705)

With the ignition based DVD-players this would work. but from the article it uses the GPS to figure out if you are moving, so you could block the antenna if you wanted to watch your family guy, but you couldn't switch over to mapping very quickly.

Oh I promise (1)

51M02 (165179) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435273)

I will never watch TV while driving. I swear it.

Now give me that Satnav and please desactivate those warnings. I swear they are not needed.

South Korea (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28435283)

Similar devices are all over the place in South Korea. There isn't much scarier than weaving through traffic while your cab driver's watching the big game.

Re:South Korea (3, Insightful)

incognito84 (903401) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435339)

Yes. I'm in South Korea too and it's something I see every day, in nearly every taxi I get in. Its extremely common to see someone tune the GPS screen into digital television stations while driving. The law has little affect on it.

It makes sense after you see a horrible accident on the high way, look into one of the vehicles in the collision and see their LCD screen displaying The Cooking Channel or something.

Re:South Korea (1)

jonoid (863970) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435681)

I can confirm this as well. Koreans have had DMB (digital multimedia broadcasting) for years now and every Korean GPS device has this built in (a long with many cell phones and other devices). I see more people driving with it on than off.

I hear there are laws against it, but police enforcement of driving rules is extremely lax here. Speed limits are generally completely ignored as are safe following distances. I've gotten used to blowing by cops on my motorcycle with nary an indication that they care. The only time you will get in trouble for anything is if you are in an accident. Thus, you can speed, drive recklessly and watch television all you want. Just don't hit anything.

Re:South Korea (1)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436083)

The Cooking Channel!!??.. heck and I thought it was difficult playing Gran Turismo while driving.

Japan Too (2, Informative)

corsec67 (627446) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435753)

It is amazing how many drivers here in Japan (specifically near Toyota City, but I assume elsewhere in this country) are watching TV while driving. Add in texting on a cell phone, not wearing seat belts and things get more dangerous.

Re:South Korea (1)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436141)

I experienced the same thing in Finland five years ago. It was kind of scary, but finnish traffic is fortunately quite calm.

TV while drivin is Darwin Award worthy... (1)

Max Romantschuk (132276) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435293)

But should it really be up to the device to monitor this? Can't I use my navigator to let the kids watch TV in the back seat if I don't need it for navigating?

A nav system integrated into the front console would be another story though...

Re:TV while drivin is Darwin Award worthy... (4, Insightful)

IBBoard (1128019) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435861)

Exactly what I was thinking - there's a use case where you know your route but only want to carry one device and so entertain the other passengers by using it as the TV rather than using the SatNav (which you may need later) as a navigation device.

Yeah, people watching TV while driving is a problem, but there are far more prevalent problems that'll cause just as many accidents: people doing 100Mph+ on Motorways with warnings of queuing ahead, people not indicating, people on mobile phones, etc.

That's fine.. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28435307)

..there is such a thing as personal responsibility and we don't need a nanny to babysit us all the time.

Life is like Unix and you are the superuser. With that comes the power to 'rm -rf' the system.. intentionally or not.

--iamnotayam

Re:That's fine.. (5, Funny)

Barny (103770) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435327)

Thats a first, a computer analogy to describe a car.

Re:That's fine.. (1)

quadrox (1174915) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435403)

I wish I had saved a mod point for this one :D

Re:That's fine.. (1)

rabiddeity (941737) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436123)

>Thats a first, a computer analogy to describe a car.

Yeah, it's like Soviet Russia met Slashdot or something.

Re:That's fine.. (2, Informative)

mail2345 (1201389) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435641)

With that, I say: And if your sharing the system(the road) with others?

Re:That's fine.. (5, Informative)

Unipuma (532655) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435653)

Sadly, they are not on the road all on their own. And as much as I won't miss them if they drive into a ravine while watching TV, I'm a bit less happy if they're driving in the oncoming lane on the same road I'm driving (or more likely, in my lane while they are fiddling with the controls).

(Kind of like I'm fine with them being superuser on their own system, but what do you do when they need to have modify rights to a network drive which also contains my work)

Re:That's fine.. (1)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436063)

I see people watching tv while driving all the time, almost nightly, and very often when on long trips.
I like to tell myself it's an illusion, that someone really has it pointed where the kid in the back seat can see the screen or whatever, but once in a while it is *blatant*, someone has a dash-mounted TV right in front of the wheel, and is alone in the car, driving on the freeway watching tv.

My other favorite thing to see, also seen extremely often, is groups of people dressed like thugs, in cars and SUV's hanging out in places like fast food restaurant parking lots, with loud music playing and hardcore porn on the screens in their cars for all to see.

Of course none of these people ever gets the slightest attention from cops, but I got pulled over for having a dim (not spent) license plate light and another time for having an air freshener hanging from the rear view mirror. I got the whole third degree on that one. Turns out it's a violation to have anything hanging from your mirror while driving.

Re:That's fine.. (1)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436489)

Sadly, they are not on the road all on their own. And as much as I won't miss them if they drive into a ravine while watching TV, I'm a bit less happy if they're driving in the oncoming lane on the same road I'm driving (or more likely, in my lane while they are fiddling with the controls).

(Kind of like I'm fine with them being superuser on their own system, but what do you do when they need to have modify rights to a network drive which also contains my work)

So it's more like a shared DOS system, where everyone is a superuser, and they can all FORMAT C?

Re:That's fine.. (5, Insightful)

johannesg (664142) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435657)

..there is such a thing as personal responsibility and we don't need a nanny to babysit us all the time.

Life is like Unix and you are the superuser. With that comes the power to 'rm -rf' the system.. intentionally or not.

--iamnotayam

Nobody really cares if the driver kills himself while being terminally stupid. The problem is that they tend to take other people with them, people who did not have any part in their idiot choices. Your right to watch TV while driving does not override other people's right to live.

Re:That's fine.. (4, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435673)

And if you kill someone, you can just restore him from a backup!

Re:That's fine.. (4, Insightful)

rastoboy29 (807168) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435779)

That is fine, except for the existence of nincompoops who are liable to rm -rf *you* or *me* while their texting or watching tv while driving.

Some people should not be allowed to have root access sometimes.

Re:That's fine.. (0, Flamebait)

bitrex (859228) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435787)

Until one day, while watching reruns of "Legend Of The Seeker" on your in-dash entertainment system and slobbering over the kind of tits you wish existed at the latest LARP convention, you manage to kill someone who doesn't share your zest for solipsism or Unix analogies. I swear Slashdot posts stories like this just to troll the libertarians that are as thick as flies on shit around here. "Life is like Unix and you are the superuser." And this gets an Insightful moderation. Shit a god damn. I suppose I'm going to have to start driving with venetian blinds on my car windows to enhance my cinematic vehicular experience, and if I drive over a libertarian I'll tell his family and friends that the free market will take care of it.

Re:That's fine.. (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435853)

Kinda sounds like you're not so much against libertarians are you are against liberty.

Re:That's fine.. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28436051)

It doesn't to me, but then I'm not a Randlicking crackpot.

Re:That's fine.. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28435899)

Glad you got that off your chest?

Notice how I didn't say that the person has no responsibility for their actions? If by their actions they manage to injure/kill someone then they should bear the full force of the law.. there are plenty on the books for driving when distracted, it's called careless/wreckless driving and it's enforced in all 50 states.

All I'm saying is that restricting the capabilities of a device 'because it knows better than the human' is not the right decision, hence the Unix analogy. Consider this, maybe the front passenger is looking at the news/weather during an emergency.. a perfectly legitimate purpose and now the car must stop because the TV wont work over 5 MPH, allowing the tornado/zombies to harm the car.

Also, I'm not a libertarian.. just a believer in not having a nanny state that is reduced to the lowest UNcommon denominator and I do appreciate the tits on the LoTS, yum.

--iamnotayam

Re:That's fine.. (1, Interesting)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436071)

If by their actions they manage to injure/kill someone then they should bear the full force of the law..

I suspect that most of the ones who go on about "personal responsibility" and "force of law" are the same ones that would, if they were up before a court, whinge and whine and cry that it wasn't intentional and so they didn't do anything wrong. That and/or try to blame the carmaker for putting the device there in the first place.

Even "full force of law" means the culprit gets to sit in old sparky, that won't bring a dead person back, enable a cripple to walk again etc.

it's called careless/wreckless

No, there will be at least one wreck.

Re:That's fine.. (1)

Ihlosi (895663) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436335)

Even "full force of law" means the culprit gets to sit in old sparky, that won't bring a dead person back, enable a cripple to walk again etc.

No no no, in case of liability, it just means that they'll be financially liquidated in order to compensate their victims. Of course, a little creativity in this process could also provide a viable deterrent.

Re:That's fine.. (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436145)

Well, yeah, clearly the solution is to empower the government to do whatever it take in order to "protect" us. I hear that George Orwell wrote an instructional manual on that subject - perhaps you could forward a copy to your local politician, just to get the ball rolling

Re:That's fine.. (1)

GF678 (1453005) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435939)

With that comes the power to 'rm -rf' the system.. intentionally or not.

A chemist friend of mine keeps an extremely corrosive acid (I forget what type) in a bottle marked "rm -rf"

Very apt name for whoever gets their hands covered in it...

Re:That's fine.. (1)

swarsron (612788) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436109)

more like 'rm -rf /home/*'. Nobody would care about 'rm -rf /root' ...

Re:That's fine.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28436215)

unfortunately there will always be retards who do need baby sat.

Re:That's fine.. (2, Insightful)

Ihlosi (895663) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436219)

..there is such a thing as personal responsibility

Your personal responsibility should be limited to your net worth. Otherwise, it's not your personal responsibility, but someone elses (whoever has to eat the difference between what you and your insurance are able to pay and the actual damage you caused).

Nice! (5, Insightful)

madfilipino (557839) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435315)

Get shitty drivers and give them mobile phones to talk on so they become even shittier drivers. Now get those bastards to watch TV while talking and texting on their mobile phones and we'll have the shittiest drivers on the road. Hopefully, these bastards will kill themselves without killing others, making the road safer for everyone else.

Oh well, back to reality.

Re:Nice! (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435585)

Hopefully, these bastards will kill themselves without killing others, making the road safer for everyone else.

Would be nice, but what if they're driving SUVs? Then they kill others with little harm to themselves.

Re:Nice! (1)

johannesg (664142) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435671)

Hopefully, these bastards will kill themselves without killing others, making the road safer for everyone else.

Would be nice, but what if they're driving SUVs? Then they kill others with little harm to themselves.

Summary executions on the side of the road. It is the only way to be sure...

Re:Nice! (3, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435807)

Now, now, be reasonable. It's not like they copied a CD or something, all they did was endangering the lives of other people.

Because if only.. (3, Informative)

profplump (309017) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435343)

Because if only we could prevent this one particular stupid thing people can do while driving we will eliminate all driving-related injuries and deaths.

Seriously, there is an endless supply of stupid, distracting things people can do while driving, with out without GPS, a cell phone, TV, children, or any of the other things they might have in their car. If someone is stupid enough to be distracted by TV while they're driving they'll likely be able to find something similarly stupid to do even if you ban every bit of technology you can name from the dashboard. Like DRM, the only thing you'll accomplish by adding silly technologically restrictions like this is annoyance for people who have legitimate uses.

Re:Because if only.. (1)

quadrox (1174915) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435467)

It is true that people always can find some way to drive unsafe (or generally be stupid). But I think that the more options for unsafe behavior are around, the more will be "used" and the more accidents will happen.

Now if only the stupid people would be affected I wouldn't really mind too much, but if innocent people get killed because some idiot absolutely had to watch TV on his satnav, I don't that would be good.

Synergy (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435761)

I think that the more options for unsafe behavior are around, the more will be "used" and the more accidents will happen.

Plus they'll probably[1] be more distracting in combination than the sum of their individual effects.

[1] no studies that I'm aware of

Re:Because if only.. (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435823)

Indeed...

You have 10 people locked in a room:

Chances are that eventually some of them will fight, but the likelihood of death (from fights) is minimal.
Same 10 people, plus a sword, the chances of fights, injury and death, are increased.
Same 10 people, a sword and a gun, the chances of fights, injuries and death are increased.

However, you could also argue that with a sword and a gun, the remaining people would be better able to prepare and eat the dead, thus increasing their chances of survival. However, that doesn't translate back to TV in vehicles very well.

Re:Because if only.. (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436093)

Have you met this guy [slashdot.org] ? You should form a club.

Re:Because if only.. (4, Interesting)

JaxTJ (855706) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435493)

Absolutely. I used to have a 45-minute commute to work when I lived in New Jersey and I honestly can't remember the number of times that I was almost run into by someone in a 3-ton SUV that was talking or texting instead of driving.

Japanese taxi drivers frequently have the TV playing on their nav units while driving, but they are among the safest drivers I've ever ridden with. I think two way communication is far more taxing to a driver's attention than a receive-only medium.

I never watch TV while driving ... (2, Funny)

electricprof (1410233) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435389)

I never watch TV while driving ... however, I do frequently shower and shave while driving.

Simple safety solution (1)

VincenzoRomano (881055) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435401)

TV should not work while the satnav moves faster than, say, 5 km/h!`
Or, if you switch TV on, it must stay still otherwise it will turn off.
It's simple, but will never be implemented!

Re:Simple safety solution (2, Informative)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435457)

Ya, that's exactly what Dodge's in-car navigation system does. And it is annoying as hell, as I'm quite capable of driving and not getting distracted by the tv while the passengers watch it.

Re:Simple safety solution (1)

GuldKalle (1065310) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435471)

What if you know the way, and your kids want to watch TV while you're driving?

Re:Simple safety solution (1)

VincenzoRomano (881055) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435667)

So your kids watch TV from 3 feet on a 10" screen?

Re:Simple safety solution (3, Interesting)

diskis (221264) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435775)

What about ferries? A hour long ferry ride would be the perfect use for a TV, but the satnav shuts itself down when the ferry leaves the port.

Re:Simple safety solution (1)

VincenzoRomano (881055) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435891)

The satnav knows that you're floating atop a ferry!

Re:Simple safety solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28436259)

Just unplug the GPS antenna or cover it with tinfoil. Sheesh, a slashdotter who doesn't have tinfoil at hand^W head.

Re:Simple safety solution (1)

Ihlosi (895663) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436437)

Just unplug the GPS antenna or cover it with tinfoil.

If that works, it's an example of lousy safety design. A proper safety mechanism would make sure that GPS reception is available _and_ the data indicates that the vehicle is stationary.

THIRD WARNING (1)

jsse (254124) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435427)

I'd say you've got about two minutes.

Really not such a big deal (1, Flamebait)

JaxTJ (855706) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435443)

The TV/Nav units in Japan (and other parts of Asia) have no such restriction and it's only a problem for lazy stupid Americans.*


*Disclaimer: JaxTJ is an American that is motivated by laziness and sometimes does stupid things.

Re:Really not such a big deal (2, Informative)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435505)

We have had those units in Europe for ages, and there was not a single problem. I am not sure if this is not an American problem alone...

Re:Really not such a big deal (1)

weirdo557 (959623) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435901)

i think the problem is the lazy stupid people themselves. but natural selection has a way of dealing with that...

Oblig. family guy reference (1, Insightful)

HansWurst (1029602) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435555)

Brian: "Look at all these Hummers. What kind of jerk would drive one of these?
Hummer Jerk: "Dude, this car kicks ass. And I can watch Madagaskar while I'm drivin'!" (looks to onboard tv)
Lion: "What kind of music do you like, Gloria?"
Hippo: "Hippo-Hop! Yeah baby!" (music kicks in)
Hummer Jerk: "Hahaha, those animals are so fucking funny, they wanna make me merge without looking! YEAH! RUMSFELD!"

http://s94.photobucket.com/albums/l89/blackh3/?action=view&current=fg-hummer.flv [photobucket.com]

Puhleez (3, Funny)

TopSpin (753) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435571)

safety campaigners fear there's little to stop the television being used at the wheel

Silly safety campaigners... don't they know we're too busy texting on our mobile phones while driving to watch TV?

What use is a car entertainment system otherwise? (1)

Mike1024 (184871) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435575)

When the system is first turned on a warning message is displayed, telling the user not to watch television while driving. If this is ignored, a secondary warning message kicks in if the GPS chip detects the vehicle is moving at more than 5mph. But that's it!"

I thought the whole point of "in car entertainment systems" was for the passengers, hence why you have displays in the back of the front seats and so on. For the kids to watch DVDs during long drives or whatever. To me that sounds much more useful than a system that only plays when stationary, because it's only occasionally that one sits in a stationary car for the duration of a TV episode.

Plenty of systems also provide a screen for the front seat passenger.

Playing videos while the car is in motion is a required feature for entertaining the kids during long drives. That's why there's nothing stopping videos playing while the vehicle is in motion.

Granted, there's a risk that by having the system in the driver's field of view they could become distracted by it, but the summary acts like there's no possible explanation for this feature, which I don't think is true.

Re:What use is a car entertainment system otherwis (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435841)

I was just thinking that. What about my passengers? Why can't they watch TV while I drive? It's like saying having a bar in your car is illegal because you might drink. I don't have to. But I might want to offer the boozeheads I transport something to shut up and be drunk.

I dunno what's more a distraction, TV in the car or bored kids. From my experience, I'd say the latter.

Re:What use is a car entertainment system otherwis (1)

Tuidjy (321055) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436499)

Depending on where you drive, it can be illegal to have an open
alcohol container on the front seat, or even in the car, period.
Same reasoning, I guess.

Watching DVD's (1)

PrinceAshitaka (562972) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435639)

Is possible in my brothers brand new 2009 ( some asian car model). [Maybe If I remember I will find out and post it later.] It doesn't matter, I don't know the brand of the navigation system as well. What is important is that he can watch DVD's while driving. The only safety feature is that the parking brake has to be engagded, but only one click and he can watch DVD's while driving. That is nothing. He could drving across europe without problems with the hand brake engaged to the first ratchet.

Already a problem in Japan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28435679)

Japanese SatNav system makers are required to install electronics that can prevent viewing while driving, and car manufacturers who install SatNav systems for their customers as part of the purchase options are required to make use of this facility. However if the SatNav is fitted later by a third-party the rule is not enforceable. And even when it is fitted as an option at purchase, the protections can be overridden by some simple rewiring (the hardest part is getting behind the dashboard to access the cabling harness.)
It is very unnerving when driving along at night to see the flickering light of the TV in the car in front of me which is carrying nobody but the driver. I usually switch lanes or overtake to get away from them. I've not seen anyone pulled over by the cops for the offence either (and it is an offense.)

Great (2, Insightful)

CaPn Corelian (575148) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435683)

More distractions for drivers will eventually mean more cyclists being killed on the road. Looking on the bright side, this could accelerate the eventual transition towards having computers assume control of vehicles on the streets.

This was handled by the wrong department. (1)

Noctris (591045) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435767)

Please forward to the I-can't-see-what-could-go-possibly-wrong dept. Many Thanks in advance.

If this is actually needed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28435843)

... I don't want to be on the same road that those that need it are on.

Seriously.

If you need to be told to not watch TV while driving, GO BE A VEGETABLE AT HOME BEFORE YOU TURN ME IN TO ONE.

Now get off my road, I have driving to do.

It's called... (4, Insightful)

Antony-Kyre (807195) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435905)

wreckless driving, and it shouldn't be tolerated. Shouldn't anyone watching TV while driving lose their license?

Re:It's called... (5, Funny)

kobatan (1103577) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435965)

Umm... it's called *reckless* driving!

Wreckless driving is desirable.

Re:It's called... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28436121)

wreckless driving, and it shouldn't be tolerated. Shouldn't anyone watching TV while driving lose their license?

No you are making the very big, and wrong, assumption that driving is actually hard.

When the roads are so blocked up and the speed limit so low that driving requires little to no concentration, how can you 1) call it reckless and 2) expect people not to phone/text/watch TV while doing it.

I swear road safety campaigners are all those morons who took 5 tries to pass their test and think that driving is actually hard to do. They should never have got the license in the first place then we could up the speed limits and all get where we are going quicker but with less accidents AND less whining.

Re:It's called... (1)

pjt33 (739471) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436227)

I swear road safety campaigners are all those morons who took 5 tries to pass their test and think that driving is actually hard to do.

Or maybe they're cyclists who've had too many frightening experiences involving drivers who weren't paying attention.

Re:It's called... (1)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436289)

Or maybe they're cyclists who've had too many frightening experiences involving drivers who weren't paying attention.

Or maybe they're drivers who've had too many frightening experiences involving cyclists who weren't paying attention.

Seriously, in all bar two of the car-vs-cyclist accidents I've seen, the cyclist has been 100% at fault. Maybe if they paid attention to the roads instead of running every red light and cycling up the inside of cars that are indicating into that lane, they wouldn't have so many "frightening experiences".

Re:It's called... (1)

Ihlosi (895663) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436445)

Or maybe they're drivers who've had too many frightening experiences involving cyclists who weren't paying attention.

How many car drivers have been killed in accidents with bicycles lately?

The problem is the lack of fear (1)

amiga3D (567632) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435923)

The reason people do things like watch television or tweet or text while behind the wheel is because they aren't afraid. They don't believe anything can happen to them. The punishment for this kind of thing should be severe. After all, they put all on the road at risk with this behavior. If the punishment actually reflected the crime then more might become cautious. I think reckless endangerment would be a good charge. A year or two in prison for subjecting their fellow motorists to the risk of loosing life and limb seems appropriate.

Better than that bl**dy nannying by kit (1)

cheros (223479) | more than 5 years ago | (#28435949)

I personally detest every bit of kit that assumes I'm some sort of moron who obviously needs to be told everything.

We have microwaves that bleep for 5 minutes just on the off chance that someone doesn't realise that microwaving means hot food, I have a dishwasher doing the same and I have come across plenty kit that keeps beeping until it gets attention, like a small child. In that same vein I consider UIs that time out so you have to do everything in a certain amount of time - the whole point of a machine is that it's not supposed to be impatient.

The main problem I see with this is that end users are less and less required to use their brain. The function "common sense" is by now all but atrophied..

I guess the counter will be class action against all those suppliers for damaging common sense, as that has wider ramifications than just the bit of kit they make..

This has been in Japan for about 5 years (2, Informative)

rips123 (654488) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436045)

The Japanese models turn the TV off altogether when the car starts moving but you can slip the dealer a bit of cash and he'll turn that "feature" off for you.

Not acceptable (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28436047)

Presumably all the people who find this acceptable would have no problem if the surgeon putting them back together after they crash watches TV whilst doing the surgery.

And A Dollar Short (3, Insightful)

DynaSoar (714234) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436057)

"... safety campaigners fear there's little to stop the television being used at the wheel."

When the original version of The Andromeda Strain aired on TV circa 1971, I packed a 12" B&W Zenith portable with a 12 V DC car cigarette lighter adapter into a friend's car and we set out watching it. He made it 2 blocks before hitting a curb. I tried and made it 1 block before doing the same. We then parked and watched the rest.

So they're right to be alarmed. They're just several decades late. But then, we knew it was stupid to try it. I suspect far more people these days wouldn't realize that unless the TV told them, and then many would still ignore it. I'd wish for natural selection to take its course with them, except it might do so head on with someone not deserving of the same fate.

amazing news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28436097)

How is this news? Satnavs in cars have been able to show television for years now (including restrictions like "not showing TV while car is moving").

This is new? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28436203)

Here in Asia, we've had cars with integrated satnav/tv/dvd for the better part of this decade. But the TV and DVD on the front screen won't operate unless the car is in park. This is of course easily defeated, and no more silly than any other 3rd party ICE system you install in your car.

Safety features... (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436245)

A lot of these "safety features" are just a nuisance...
Many satnavs wont let you adjust the route if you're moving, but what if a passenger in the vehicle is trying the adjust the route on behalf of the driver? Similarly with TV, what if passengers want to watch it?

Stupid drivers will kill themselves regardless, if they can't watch tv on this as they drive they will just take their own portable set, or portable dvd player, or use a phone, or whatever else they're gonna do which is dangerous. All these "safety features" do is inconvenience the legitimate users.

Just a few years ahead of the curve (1)

zmollusc (763634) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436251)

A road I often travel down used to have no speed limit, then it was 40mph, then 30mph and soon it will be 20mph. I have no doubt that the speed limit will eventually be a rigidly enforced 5mph and I can happily watch tv to while away the many hours on the road.

What is the news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28436379)

tv-tuner in the satnav is nothing new? Audi's had it since 2000 or even earlier .. nothing to see here.

Re:What is the news? (1)

Ihlosi (895663) | more than 5 years ago | (#28436419)

tv-tuner in the satnav is nothing new?

It's probably a tuner for digital tv now. ;)

Anonymous Coward 4566 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28436403)

already got that TV stuff on my 5 year old Pioneer SatNav, so nothing new under the sun...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?