 
Rogue Wolf
Is Not One To Squander His Investments
join:2003-08-12
Saratoga Springs, NY
|  Internet in the car?!
There's already too many idiots on the roads doing makeup, reading the newspaper, jabbering on the cell phone, etc. while randomly switching lanes or doing 20 MPH over/under the speed limit. I don't need some moron rear-ending me at a stoplight because he couldn't find a clip on YouTube.
Why can't people JUST DRIVE and do all that other crap when they get where they're going? 
--
I have learned to ignore such naysayers, when... quelling... them... hm?... was out of the question. | |
|  | Mce Saint
join:2007-10-03
Saint Louis, MO
| Re: Internet in the car?! Stand at the shore and command the waves to stop much? lol.
That ship sailed a looonnnggg time ago.
It's hard to see how in-car internet is anymore "distracting" than navigational devices (TomTom, Magellan, etc.), dvd players, radios, iPods/MP# players, cellphones, fast food, smoking, and bratty kids in the back seat.
Many people are able to safely and responsibly eat,listen to music, talk, etc. while driving OR - if not driving - from the comfort and safety of their vehicle.
Bad driving ought to be punished - not devices prohibited. We already have laws prohibiting reckless driving and if the "recklessness" is caused by cellphone useage, dvd watching, or whatever - so be it. But *banning* such things because *some* drivers cannot use them safely while driving penalizes those who can do so safely.
Our vehicles have an increasing ability to monitor our human actions while a vehicle is under way (i.e., "black boxes" that monitor speed, braking, etc.). From a certain perspective, it would actually be *better* to link "distracting" devices like cellphones and laptops INTO that monitoring system, than to leave them outside of the loop.
When the insurance company denies your accident claim because it has definitive proof (from the car's "black box") that you were inattentive because you were surfing internet porn at the time of the accident, that's a pretty powerful incentive to use such "distracting" devices in a responsible manner. As it stands right now, the insurance company has, effectively, no way to determine that I was on my laptop (hooked to my U727) while rocking down the highway. | |
| | | Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX
| Re: Internet in the car?! Agree. Yesterday I was hit in a parking lot by an idiot in a delivery vehicle (large box type truck) that just shoved it in reverse and started to back up and didn't see or hear me. I could not get out of his way due to traffic behind me, so I took the hit. If he had been on the internet concerning his activity at that location, I would have probably been shoved into traffic.
Anyone that thinks that internet in a vehicle is a good thing doesn't drive much and see the idiots with the cell phones glued to their ear and ignoring all traffic around them. | |
| | | 
just_4_fun
Premium
join:2000-10-18
Trenton, NJ
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
edit:
March 28th, @07:23AM
| said by Mce Saint  :Many people are able to safely and responsibly eat,listen to music, talk, etc. while driving OR - if not driving - from the comfort and safety of their vehicle. As it stands right now, the insurance company has, effectively, no way to determine that I was on my laptop (hooked to my U727) while rocking down the highway. Most people that think they are skilled enough operate a cell or blackberry and drive at the same time aren’t great drivers to begin with. I’ve been watching this since cell phones made they way into the cars. The simple facts are hand held cell phone users can’t hold the lanes, there is always a delay in their reactions with developing traffic patterns and they are usually too busy (or stupid) to use their turn signals. | |
| Mce Saint
join:2007-10-03
Saint Louis, MO
| Chrysler Not sure what to think of the Chrysler story (the dig at Chrysler products in the linked article seems unwarranted - Chrysler, afterall, also makes all Jeep products and - judging from observation - few seem "embarassed" to be driving them).
How long before some state legislator introduces a bill banning "internet surfing" while driving?
More seriously, wouldn't the real goal to have a mobile internet connection that goes anywhere you do - not one that's limited to the vehicle? Aircards and EVDO phones already do that . . . and Chrysler's plan doesn't seem to move that ball further down the field. I think the "better" direction would be to make aircards and EVDO phones more useable IN the vehicle - not to "replace" them with internet service tied/anchored to my car.
For example, I have Sprint Mobile Broadband (U727), the "problem/obstacle" to using the U727 in the car is (1) I have to have my laptop going; and (2) - depending upon the laptop's battery status - plugged into a power source.
For me a "better solution" would be the ability to plug the U727 into a USB port in the car's dash. A USB port would also work for those who "tether" their internet with a EVDO compatible phone.
IMO, it makes more sense for the automobile to provide JUST the "laptop" portion (integrated into the dash) of the wireless internet equation than it does for the car to provide BOTH the wireless modem portion AND the laptop portion. $30, $40, or $60 a month for internet service that ONLY works when I'm in the car seems unreasonable. I want to take that connection into the house, into the office, or into the woods (coverage willing).
My initial, off-the-cuff reaction is that it's sort of similar to how I use XM's service. Because of the price of service, I prefer that my XM radio give me as much functionality as possible. That means the ability to use it places OTHER than the car. That's why I prefer the *portable* XM solutions to one's that are wholly in vehicle. Indeed, if, at the time of purchase, I did not already have several portable XM radios (Skyfi2 and an Inno), the inclusion of XM capability on the wife's car would not have made a difference to us. Because I *had* several portable XM devices (and, therefore, an XM subscription), it was a nice feature.
Furthermore, the current pricing structure of wireless internet service is that each "device" (modem) gets charged full price. So, if I owned two U727's devices, my cost would be approximately $120 a month - that's pretty pricey. If that's where Chrysler is heading, then I'm skeptical that many consumers are going to pay 2x "full price" for internet service (one for their car; one for their home). | |
| 
plk
bo may sleep in loft
Premium
join:2002-04-20
Ogden, IA
| skype bolsters security eweek ad -endless loop Clicking on this link leads me to a endless ad. It just keeps starting over. I hate these damn type of ad's. Usually I just avoid these web sites.
I suppose they do that to bolster they own "hit rate" so they can give false data to advertisers.
--
Thermaltake 2000a/Asus P4C-e/p4 3.4/ocz3500 2x512/WD.2x200g/raptor2x74 raid 0/ATI 9600/APC sua 1500/Logitech z-680/ Samsung 213t LCD/MX 1000 | |
| | | |
|
