Driver expects to fight Google Glass ticket

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP-Excite

By JUSTIN PRITCHARD

LOS ANGELES (AP) - An early adopter of Google's Internet-connected eyeglasses plans to fight a citation for wearing the device while driving in San Diego, saying the technology makes navigation easier than smartphones and GPS devices.

Driver Cecilia Abadie was pulled over for speeding Tuesday evening, when a California Highway Patrol officer noticed she was wearing Google Glass and tacked on a citation usually given to drivers who may be distracted by a video or TV screen.

A challenge to what may be a first-of-its-kind citation could force authorities to re-examine laws and consider how best to regulate evolving gadgetry that will one day become mainstream.

The lightweight eyeglasses, which are not yet widely available to the public, feature a hidden computer and a thumbnail-size transparent display screen above the right eye. Users can scan maps for directions - as well as receive web search results, read email and engage in video chats - without reaching for a phone.

FULL story at link.


Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20131101/DA9PH2I01.html

---

This undated photo released courtesy Cecilia Abadie shows Cecilia Abadie a software developer from Temecula, Calif., during a presentation. Abadie was pulled over for speeding on Tuesday Oct. 29, 2013, in San Diego, when a California Highway Patrol officer noticed she was wearing Google Glass and tacked on a citation usually given to drivers who may be distracted by a video or TV screen. (AP Photo/Courtesy Cecilia Abadie)

[freshwest]

1. Since she was 'pulled over for speeding' the glasses didn't help much... DRIVING FAIL!

[awoke_in_2003]

2. Just what we need...

drivers who are even more distracted. I ride a motorcycle to save gas- 45 MPG. Sometimes it is like being in a demolition derby. Want to crack down on this crap? First offense, $500 fine. Second offense- week in jail.

[customerserviceguy]

28. We take away the driving privilege

from those who cannot control their drinking and driving, as shown by their piling up of multiple offenses, isn't it time to do the same thing with texters and Google Glassers? I don't know if five years with a suspended license will make these addicts think twice, but it might get a few more of them off the road when they are caught.

[awoke_in_2003]

31. I agree...

one day they will kill someone, at most get charged with involuntary manslaughter, and get probation. They will destroy a life because of their selfish negligence and will pay nothing for it.

[groundloop]

3. I fully agree - we don't need any more distracted drivers

Aiming a 3000 or 4000 pound projectile down the road is a full time job. It's so darned obvious that drivers don't do as good a job when they're doing something else besides driving - speed up, slow down, swerve to get back in their lane. Technology that takes attention away from driving is dangerous and we don't need more of it.

[jsr]

4. "Receive web search results, read email, engage in video chats" while driving?

Awesome.

[PoliticAverse]

5. Well someone had to be a 'test case'... n/t

[onehandle]

6. Yes. Fight for your right to be a speeding 'Glasshole.'

That will accelerate Google Glass being written specifically into these laws.

Slow clap.

[shawn703]

7. Sorry, that's not going to fly

For one, just looking at the Google Glass in that photo makes it apparent that the device would hinder peripheral vision.

I want to know who thought it was a bright idea to incorporate navigation into Google Glass in the first place. Like that's not just asking for trouble.

[frylock]

36. would they hinder peripheral vision any more than these?

i wear these every day while i drive or ride my motorcycle, and my peripheral vision is perfectly fine.

[shawn703]

45. I would say so

Look how far out in front of the right eye that part of the Google glass is, and this looks to be a solid piece of metal or plastic. There is nothing comparable to that on the glasses you wear.

[jtuck004]

8. People can fly airplanes at several hundred miles an hour with a head's up display

such as this, and have a lot more to pay attention to. Cops have computers they are typing things into and reading from as they drive down the street, as do truck drivers and a few other drivers.

Is this as distracting as a cell phone? Probably not. A highway digital display? One of those LED billboards? You can see through this display.

It may not be that distracting, all the the time. And they don't block your vision any more than a big pair of horn-rimmed glasses.

On the other hand, it's no defense for speeding, which I would bet she would have been doing regardless. Maybe they should alert her, the display turn red and blink.

Maybe there's an app for that. Or will be soon.

[Orrex]

11. If the Google Glass display is specifically designed to improve driving, then maybe

A pilot's HUD isn't a feed from YouTube running alongside the latest Instagram offerings coupled with email and instant messaging.

[jtuck004]

13. This is a prototype, probably with no advertising. Checking email might be a bit much,

but a less detailed route map would certainly be workable.

[Orrex]

14. If drivers receive the same intensive training as pilots, then ok

If we're simply talking about a bunch of assholes with a gadget strapped to their faces, then no thanks.

[jtuck004]

16. How much training does one get when they buy a GPS at Walmart and stick in on their

dash, and then look at it while driving to their delivery, or patient, or meeting?

[Orrex]

17. Is the GPS strapped to their face?

[frylock]

33. no, it's usually on the dash positioned so that the driver takes their eyes off the road..

in order see it, same as the radio.

[Orrex]

34. Do a lot of GPS units support YouTube and Facebook?

Purpose-specific electronics intended to operate in support of the driving of the vehicle are manifestly and undeniably different from electronic gadgets designed to funnel "content" and advertising to consumers. I can readily operate my car radio without taking my eyes from the road, and I suspect that I am not unique in this regard.

But if I'm reading an important article about Kim & Kanye's baby while I'm driving, that's very different.

[frylock]

37. no, but smartphones do..

is there evidence that she was facebooking, or reading articles about kim and kanye while driving, or is this about the potential to do those things while driving? if it's the latter, than why not just make an across the board law that makes it illegal to have any cell phone in your vehicle that isn't secured in your pocket or purse?

have you used google glass? i'm guessing that they are designed to operate readily without taking one's eyes off the road, much like you when changing radio stations or adjusting the volume.

[Orrex]

40. Any number of studies show that cell phone use impairs driving

Are there similar studies showing that Google Glass does not?

As to your other question, I would support measures to restrict phone use while driving. An all out ban on phones in the car is unrealistic. You are suggesting that there is no possible, reasonable middle ground between "anything goes" and "nothing whatsoever."

Why not create a special holder so that drivers can read their Kindles while speeding down the road?

[frylock]

41. but i am suggesting that there is a middle ground..

some posters believe that she should have been cited for merely adorning these glasses, regardless of whether they were powered on or not. I have not used GG, but I do use my dash-mounted smartphone as a GPS device, or to listen to music. I don't see the difference between that and a car stereo or traditional GPS. the assumption appears to be that if people have GG, that they are going to be texting, emailing, facebooking, etc. my point is that people already have the potential to do that. being in possession of a device that has those capabilities, not unlike a mobile phone, shouldn't provide a basis for automatically assuming guilt. this woman states that her device was powered off, and I have yet to see any evidence to counter her claim.

[Orrex]

42. Why would you wear the device if it isn't powered on?

While the frames do not currently have lenses fitted to them, Google is considering partnerships with sunglass retailers such as Ray-Ban or Warby Parker, and may also open retail stores to allow customers to try on the device.[1]

Is this statement not accurate? If there are no lenses, then why wear them while not using the monitor?

I reject the "listening to the radio" argument as an invalid comparison, at least on its face. If one is scrolling through iTunes or reading through their Pandora selections, then maybe it's the same as texting, but if you're flipping through the dial as on any non-smart modern car radio, then it is easy to do so (by design) without taking your eyes off the road.

the assumption appears to be that if people have GG, that they are going to be texting, emailing, facebooking, etc. my point is that people already have the potential to do that.

In answer, I point out that advocates for Google Glass are suggesting that it's no different from a pilot's HUD, which simply is not the case. If a driver is shown to be using a smart phone or Google Glass in an unlawful manner while driving, then I'd say it's entirely fair game for citation.

[FrodosPet]

43. I was riding with someone a couple weeks ago

It might as well have been. It seems like he was watching the GPS more than the road.

[Major Nikon]

12. Flying an airplane is nothing like driving a car

You don't have a 12' lane to stay inside and you don't have other vehicles 5' away from you. Furthermore there is information that you have to be aware of at all times. Nobody needs to scan their GPS constantly and even in aircraft GPS map information is not displayed by heads up display systems.

[jtuck004]

15. The aircraft I was referring to isn't commercial, and your room for error is sometimes much

less than in a car. And it's a lot more complicated than a beemer.

If this is unworkable, all those millions of Garmins are going to have to be taken off the dash and disposed of, because looking at those takes your eyes off the road, and I suspect are a hell of a lot less safe than a similar map in a transparent rectangle that you can see while still looking at the road.

But, perhaps this is a younger person's game. Maybe older people are too afraid of the technology, or they can't conceptualize of how it might work, or there might be physical limitations.

Fact is there are millions of vehicles out there with radios and displays and computers that people safely interact with on a daily basis. This might well become one of them.

[Orrex]

18. I'm sure that they'll be every bit as safe as texting.

Did you seriously invoke the ridiculous "old folks don't understand" bullshit?

Puh-leeze!

[Major Nikon]

19. It's a very different situation

There's a lot of information you have to be aware of in flight simply to insure safe operation. The only thing you really need to be aware of in a car is your speed.

I once had a retired airline captain tell me that the first thing you should do in an emergency is smoke a cigarette. Most things you have to deal with just don't happen all that quickly in an airplane. It's a very different environment that requires very different skills.

[jtuck004]

21. Doesn't mean it's not workable. I would rather this than someone trying to read the display on their

phone, or unfold a map or atlas, and that happens every day of the week.

[Major Nikon]

22. Before the wonder of GPS, most pilots flew with a map in their lap

Many still do.

However, as far as cars go it shouldn't be a matter of which distractions are the least stupid. A GPS is not something you need to view constantly, and most of them today will talk to you.

[jtuck004]

26. These come with an off switch. And, frankly, a LOT of people drive successfully with at least this

much impairment in their vision. It doesn't get in the way like everyone thinks. And while a GPS may talk to you, I still see people looking over and fiddling with the buttons, eyes completely off the road. That doesn't happen with this kind of display.

I suspect the number of people that have actually looked through something similar to this numbers in the low thousands, so the odds that anyone here has actually tried this is probably low.

Also, your eyes can change focus a little, look at this a little and still have eyes on the road and everyone next to them, then move their focus back to the road, backgrounding this and looking right through it. That is different from virtually every other technology or paper solution out there.

Not saying it will be trouble free in all cases, but it's no worse than all the people with cell-phones stuck in their ear today, and that's here, in a place where that is illegal. And I suspect a damn site better for the majority of them.

And as cars get more automatic, it will matter even less. We have already been on the road next to driver-less cars, so it may not be that far away.

[DeSwiss]

9. Her glasses needs a new program.

- A, ''there's a cop with a speedgun nearby'' kinda program specifically.

K&R

[Marrah_G]

10. Distracted driving

We need less of it.

[SheilaT]

23. She was speeding.

Google glasses, contact lenses, no glasses (even if they were mandated on her license), all of that doesn't matter. She was speeding.

Don't speed. What's complicated about that?

[truthisfreedom]

25. What part of "a California Highway Patrol officer noticed she was wearing Google Glass and tacked on

a citation" don't you understand? It's not about the speeding ticket. It's about the additional citation. READ THE ARTICLE. It's like having faux news in here.

[Orrex]

35. Well no shit.

If he stopped her on speeding and happened to notice a crate of illegal contraband parrots on the passenger seat, he'd probably tack on a citation for that, too.

Are you suggesting that a cop who stops you for speeding can only cite you for speeding? Or are you reiterating the point which everyone here already knows, that she is contesting the additional citation?

[sendero]

24. She will lose..

.. but she is welcome to try. Also, she is apparently not too bright and I'd prefer she not drive on the same roads I do.

[seveneyes]

27. I suspect Google may be supplying the lawyers

Google has the most to benefit from a win.

[MindPilot]

29. there was the same freakout decades ago when cars got radios

Yeah that was gonna turn the nation's highways into rivers of blood. And yet despite the safety Nazi's hand wringing the fatality/injury/accident rate has trended steadily down for many years.

Abadie claims the device was off. That would make this a precedent-setting case since the same would apply to say a laptop on the front seat. Even if it's off I guess it is potential distraction.

Cops have in-car computers GPS display, cellphones and for some reason it is not illegal for them. Are cops just better people than the rest of us?

I drive that particular stretch of freeway everyday; 80 is a perfectly comfortable and safe speed.

[frylock]

38. all good points

[JoeyT]

32. Unless they were controlling her pacemaker,

insulin pump, or other device necessary to her survival, she can take them off when she's driving or pay the damned ticket. (Facebook isn't necessary to survival.)

I'm sure there are people that can drive fine with stuff overlaid over traffic, but most people won't be able to. There are people that could safely do a hundred in residential areas too, but we shouldn't accommodate them either.

[moriah]

46. What about a maps/GPS app?

I don't know which is worse for distraction: playing with a paper map, playing with your GPS in the car, or having the map show up in your field of vision while you're driving. Or having a human navigator who you end up arguing with.

[HappyMe]

39. For one thing, she was speeding.

I think those glasses should fall into the texting and blathering on the phone category. Distracted is distracted.

[marshall]

44. Flashback to 1930: Radios in Cars? Oh No!

None of us can likely remember 1930, but many folks had a very similar reaction in 1930 when the radio was introduced into cars. Opponents were sure that fiddling with the controls would distract the driver and cause innumerable accidents.