Texting, Driving, Laws, and Responsibility
From Josh in response to Texting Kills: Cell Phone Use Impairs
Drivers More than Alcohol:
Charles,
Speeding is also shown to be a major factor in injury crashes and it
is universally banned, but there aren't enough cops out there to
catch everybody who speeds every time in order for punishment to be a
deterrent. Depending on how eager one is to realize the notion of an
Orwellian police state, I'm not sure that's such a bad thing.
Your column pits the greater good against the individual want -
always a hot-button topic. We rely a great deal on other people "doing
the right thing" in a free society not because they're made to, but
because they want to. Being a bit of a libertarian, I err on the side
of personal freedom. I think that law should be a mutually-agreed-upon
list of things that we all say are universally bad and shouldn't do.
The rest should be left up to the individual. Consequently, I get a bit
annoyed when the government tells me I can't do something that I trust
myself to do responsibly, just because someone else has proven that
they can't do that same thing without causing harm.
I do agree with you about driving while texting, though, and even
driving while talking. (I also would argue that shopping while texting
should be a criminal offence, but that's a subject for another column.)
I'm a computer repair technician, and my van is my office. Now, you'd
think that I would be constantly on the go, talking on my phone,
punching in things into my BlackBerry, swerving in and out of traffic.
Not so. My company universally bans the use of mobile devices while
operating company vehicles, unless you have a handsfree headset, then
you can receive calls. They cite insurance liabilities as their
reasoning, of course, not to make a social statement, but it has the
same prohibitive effect.
I will admit that I use my phone while on the road a lot more than I
should, which should be, frankly, not at all. What makes texting, IM,
and other such technologies more dangerous than even a phone call is
that they require complex, fast-paced responses in order to serve as
the equivalent of a face-to-face conversation. We are being conditioned
to believe that when a message is received, it must be responded
to as soon as possible. Nor can we begin to pretend that such a
communication can be attempted without taking one's eyes off the
road.
Car manufacturers know that distracted driving is bad, and they
invest millions every year to figure out where to place radio, climate
control, and cruise control buttons in cars so that you can use muscle
memory to turn up Bon Jovi or warm your seat. They have no control over
the labyrinthine menus that today's phones have, though, and texting,
mobile GPS, et cetera, are not activities best done blind. I can't even
get the guy in front of me to use his freakin' turn signal. Of course,
it's because he's reading the New York Times while eating a
cheeseburger, and now we've added the extra distraction of watching
YouTube on his iPhone.
Ultimately, it's a question of priorities, I think, which is
terribly, horribly relative. Cell phones and all other electronic
gadgets have their places, and, as we go forward in an increasingly
connected and wired society, we have to keep in mind that we cannot
individually control the behavior of others, only of ourselves, and we
will have to decide how our priorities have changed. How do we get
people to judiciously unplug and put the safety of their fellow
motorists and passengers at the forefront? Do we rely on their best
judgment and hope that they act responsibly? Do we swing to the other
side and say "This is a bad thing, let's not do it anymore?" Or does
the answer lie somewhere in between? I see an opportunity for Apple
here. A system that allows you to respond to something someone has said
by using your voice. I know it's been thought of before but no one has
really done it right.
Hmm. Somebody call Steve. I enjoyed the column. Keep it up!
Regards,
Josh
Hi Josh,
Thanks for the comment. In a way, you've
unintentionally highlighted the distinction between libertarian and
conservative - I categorize myself as the latter, paleo and not neo.
Libertarians and conservatives share a fair bit of attitude and
conviction, but one area where we do part company is perhaps on legal
restriction of certain behaviors.
American social philosopher Thomas Sowell has
framed the dialectic in terms of "constrained" and "unconstrained",
arguing that the most significant distinction between these two
paradigmatic visions is that the constrained camp perceives and expects
the natural order of things to be harsh and difficult and are more
surprised when things go well than when they do not. In this
unforgiving environment, the constrained seek systems and methods that
will actually work, and regard the existence of any significant degree
of peace, prosperity, and comfort as a major and precarious
achievement, arrived at only through great effort and no small degree
of enforced order.
Libertarians (I have several good friends who are, and
was actually a member of the Libertarian Party of Canada for a short
time, before it sunk in that I wasn't really libertarian) in many
respects have more in common with classical liberalism (as distinct
from the Marxism-lite that masquerades under the liberal banner these
days) than classical conservatism.
Of course, we all have our inconsistencies. You
mention speeding, and I've been a speeder for more than 40 years
(without hurting or killing anybody), but I do sincerely believe with a
fair bit of scientific corroboration that open highway speed limits in
North America are absurdly low.
For example, Following the 1973 oil crisis, the US
government imposed a national 55 mile per hour speed limit. Claims of
an initial side-benefit reduction in traffic fatalities have been hotly
disputed, with some statistical analyses indicating that the highway
safety record worsened in the first few months of the 55 mph limit,
then regressed to mean by 1978. When Congress finally repealed federal
speed limit in November 1995 - to much caterwauling and dire
predictions of 6,400 increased deaths and a million additional injuries
- the actual effect was dramatically the opposite. Traffic deaths
dropped to a record low by 1997, including in the 33 states that had
immediately raised their speed limits.
Likewise, a study by the National Motorists
Association found that the safest period on Montana's Interstate
highways was when there were no daytime speed limits or enforceable
speed laws. When Montana implemented a new "safety program", imposing
speed limits and enforcement, the state's fatal accident rate didn't
just increase, it doubled according to NMA statistics. Other
interesting findings of the Montana study were that vehicles traveling
faster than average had the lowest accident rates, and there was no
positive correlation between speed enforcement and accident rates on
rural highways. If anything, the highways became less safe.
in most European countries the highway speed limit is
120 kmph (75 mph) or 130 kmph (81 mph). Britain and Sweden have the
lowest speed limits at 110 kmph (68 mph). About three-quarters of the
famous German Autobahnen have no speed limit at all. The "recommended
"velocity is 130 kmph, but average speeds traveled in unregulated areas
are about 150 kmph (93 mph), with some vehicles cruising at 200 kmph
(124 mph) or more. Nevertheless, the overall safety record on
Autobahnen is comparable to that on controlled-access highways in other
European countries. A 2005 study by the German Interior Ministry found
sections with unrestricted speed had the same accident record as
sections with speed limits. (An interesting sub-note is that the
Autobahn limit in construction zones is 80 kmph/50 mph.)
I don't think anyone could construct a rational case
that texting while driving is anything other than grossly dangerous and
irresponsible. A new study, results of which were released the day
after my LEM piece on the topic was posted based on research conducted
by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, found that a driver is a
whopping 23.2 times more likely to crash if they text while behind the
wheel as an undistracted driver, so it appears that I actually
understated the case
You can download a
PDF abstract of the study.
Charles
DEVONthink vs. Spotlight and Acrobat
From Cliff:
I've read the reviews. I've inspected the website. I confess that I
still don't know what DEVONthink does that Adobe Acrobat (for OCR) and
Searchlight don't do.
I read happy users extolling its virtues but am unable to understand
how its search differs markedly from a Searchlight search. Perhaps you
might explain its utility vs. these two other programs (working
together).
Thank you.
Cliff
Hi Cliff,
DEVONthink is a slippery application to define,
because it does so many things, searches being just one of them. I
think you're probably referencing Spotlight in your note, which is a
decent but limited search engine.
The particular advantage of DEVONthink's search engine
is it's quasi-AI ability to categorize and refine searches under a
variety of user-selected criteria.
DEVONthink is also a powerful desktop database and a
serviceable PDF and Microsoft Word document reader. It can also save
documents in Word (although not with full Word formatting support), as
well as RTF, RTFD, and OmniOutliner file formats - and additionally to
your iPod or as an HTML formatted website document. Adobe Acrobat is an
excellent program, but limited to working with PDF files. DEVONthink,
on the other hand, opens PDFs by default as editable text and can
export them in any of the file formats noted above.
DEVONthink's built-in OCR can work with any
image-based file that you convert to a high-res TIFF file. DEVONthink
Professional supports standard flatbed scanners and the Fujitsu
ScanSnap, and it allows you to either scan documents directly within
the application or by importing already scanned files. The embedded
ReadIRIS OCR technology makes the PDFs it creates searchable while
maintaining their layout and places an invisible (but machine-readable)
text layer behind the scanned image.
DEVONthink also has a built-in Web browser based on
Apple's WebKit, although I find that personally of limited use and
prefer to use regular browsers.
With DEVONthink, you can import and catalogue all your
email files.
The program also incorporates an RTF word
processor/editor, which is serviceable, although not exactly
feature-rich, and I miss the customized AppleScript support in my
favorite word-cruncher, Tex-Edit Plus,
so I tend to only use DEVONthink's word processor for rudimentary
editing.
Hope this helps a bit. If you're curious, my
recommendation would be to download the demo (free) and give it a
whirl, with the caveat that it's not the most intuitive program to
learn, so you need to read the manuals and climb a bit of a learning
curve in order to really appreciate what the program can do.
Charles
DEVONthink, The Bridge, and Photo Management
From Adam:
After reading in recent columns about DEVONthink (DT), it seems to
remind me of a program I found linked to on the Apple website once,
called Personal Brain, a cross
platform visual database program. I had it installed for about a week,
but it was decidedly too resource hungry even for my heavily upgraded
Gigabit Ethernet (DP
500, 1.5 GB RAM, Radeon 9800 Pro, 2 x 120 GB HD) or my Quicksilver (Single 800, 1 GB
RAM, 4 HDs totaling 1.25 TB). I was recently able to purchase something
decidedly less low-end for my photography business - a 2006 Mac Pro. Unfortunately, I still
only have 2 GB of RAM, so running Photoshop CS3, along with Mail,
Firefox, iCal, and the half dozen other programs I use to manage my
life, still puts me a bit light on resources.
I was wondering if you'd heard of or tried Personal Brain and what
your thoughts are in comparison to DT. While DT will give you a demo
(which I intend to try soon), Personal Brain is freeware at the
personal level. PB "Core" is $150 and PB "Pro" is $250. I'm having
trouble finding out what the difference is though.
My reason for thinking of these is that I'm on the lookout for a
good photo management system. Currently, I have one very large hard
drive dedicated to photos. The Canon software downloads them into dated
directories, and I add a name after the date to remind me of the event.
Then I go to all the processing and stuff I do to get it ready for the
gallery within those folders, as well as prepare the images for the
web. All my editing includes (and this is the crucial bit) adding to
the EXIF of the file my contact info, info about where and why the
picture was taken, copyright info, and keywords that are searchable by
the various image galleries I use (still looking for "the one"). What I
need is a program that leaves my directory structure intact but is able
to add all the metadata I use easily, as well as find stuff for me.
Because, let's face it, when you're looking for a specific PSD and all
of them are named something like _MG_1022.psd, it's kinda hard to
remember filenames.
I've tried iPhoto and various other photo studio apps, but they all
are not good enough for me to abandon my current system. iPhoto's
biggest problem is that I can't point it away from the boot drive,
otherwise the 09 iteration is quite nice. When you've got 500+ GB of
photos, anything that tries to catalogue them by moving them somewhere
else just won't work.
It seems as though these database programs are geared towards
writing books, managing various office projects that include lots of
files and random snippets of information, and similar projects. If I
could find a program as useful, that allowed me to do all my EXIF
tricks and just generally kept a more organized and browsable structure
to everything, I'd use it in a heartbeat, and probably even pay up to
$100 for it.
-Adam
Hi Adam,
DEVONthink can handle photo management, but that
function is not one of its main foci.
I was previously unaware of Personal Brain. Looks
interesting, but I'm not a fan of resource-hog applications, which is
one reason why I'm a DEVONthink fan. It runs tolerably well on my 1.33
GHz PowerBook G4 with 1.5 GB RAM, and is zippy on my 2.0 GHz MacBook
with 4 GB RAM.
For photo organization and management, I'm wondering
if you've tried Adobe's Bridge CS3 program, which has come bundled with
Photoshop Elements since the release of Version 6, as well as of course
with Photoshop CS.
The Bridge (previously only available with Adobe
Creative Suite applications) lets you browse through your hard drive to
locate the photos you want to open and manipulate. It also lets you
export photos from iPhoto.
The Bridge has several panels that help you find and
preview your photos, review associated metadata, and so forth. You can
use any of the predefined arrangements of these panels - called
Workspaces - by clicking the numbered Workspace buttons in the lower
right hand corner of Bridge, or create your own custom Workspace by
hiding the panels you don't use.
Another Bridge feature, called "Stacks," lets you
dispense with iPhoto and organize your photos into stacks of images.
Stacks let you keep each series of photos in a single spot in Adobe
Bridge for Photoshop Elements, making it easier and faster to find the
photos you want, since stacks reduce unwanted clutter.
Bridge lets you use Keywords to help you categorize
and find photos in ever-growing photo libraries. You can use the
Keywords panel, located on the right side of Bridge (in the default
Workspace layout), to easily add keywords that represent favorite
people, places, or events, and assign them to photos. You can instantly
view every photo taken of a person, place, or event by simply filtering
on one or more keywords.
You can also employ a feature called Collections,
which lets you save groups of favorite photos as as a Collection for
quick access and viewing, or to gather together photos you want to use
in a project. An example of how you might use Collections would be if
you have several cameras, you can segregate your library based on the
camera you used to capture your shots.
Photoshop Elements has to be one of the greatest ever
software bargains. It amount of power you get for $89.95 makes it a
stupendous value, and the addition of The Bridge is icing on the cake
(and only included in the Mac version).
Charles
<center>***</center>,
I'll have to try Bridge again. I've had every version of Photoshop
from 5 to CS3 except CS2, so I had tried out Bridge when they first
introduced it, but it was quite slow and clunky back then. I haven't
really given it a second thought since then. Giving it a cursory glance
here at work (we have CS2), it seems much better than I remember it.
I'm sure the dual G5 helps out in that regard. Thanks for the tip, I'm
looking forward to seeing how my Mac Pro (06) handles the CS3 version.
You may have just saved me many hours of tedious organizing.
-Adam
Hi Adam,
I'm delighted to have been of service. I hope The
Bridge works out for you.
Charles
Bridge is working out great for me so far. If it had a simple-to-use
geotagging feature and integration with a few different web albums I
use, I wouldn't need anything else.
I wanted to also praise you on your medical marijuana commentary.
While I certainly don't support recreational use, I see absolutely no
logical reason why a doctor shouldn't be able to prescribe marijuana
for whatever use they deem appropriate, and it should be widely
available at pharmacies. I am especially impressed by your response, as
it seems most Christians (including a lot at my church) simply have the
propagandized view of marijuana and fail to see or hear about the
health benefits, yet many of these people have no problem popping
Vicodin or other similar drugs given to them by their doctors.
I have no personal desire to smoke pot. I hate the smell, and I'm
pretty sure there's still a running bet amongst a certain group of
people about getting me to try it. But, as someone with severe chronic
pain, I can certainly understand the desperate desire for relief. I
mainly try to control my pain with chiropractic and OTC painkillers,
which honestly only ever take the edge off. A pill form of marijuana
would certainly be something I'd be willing to try, if it were legal to
do so.
-Adam
Hi Adam,
That's great about The Bridge. It was a new feature
added to Photoshop Elements 6 for Mac, so I expect that a lot of folks
are unaware that it's now included, increasing the value of the program
substantially.
We appear to be pretty much on the same page about
medical marijuana as well - and yes, there is a rational disconnect for
a lot of Christians on the topic. I appreciate (and share) qualms about
straying outside the law, but there seems to be a strong
ideological/moral element for most as well, which I can only attribute
to a failure to think the issue through rationally, at least for anyone
who thinks taking prescription Vicodin or extremely addictive Oxycontin
is just fine while arguing that there is any moral failure attached to
taking legal medical marijuana therapeutically.
For me, OTC painkillers like Tylenol or the various
NSAIDs don't even take the edge off. Codeine 60 mg helps a wee bit but
makes me sleepy, and ditto for Klonopin. I have a filled prescription
for Tramedol, but am not happy about the side-effect profile. Based on
the positive experiences of folks I know with taking Cannabis
for pain (both legally and illegally), finding it both effective and
non-drowsiness-inducing, I would use it in a heartbeat if it were legal
to do so and not absurdly-priced (e.g.: Sativex).
Charles
Vaporize Your Pot, Don't Smoke It
From Brink:
Hi,
It is a hazard to your health to smoke anything.
I have a tall Turkish water pipe, I use in the following manner: I
wet the cannabis with water until it is saturated. I then pack it on
top of the pipe screen. Then I take a heat gun (like a hair dryer on
steroids) and blow the vapors into the water chamber and make sure to
inhale the vapors before they condense on the glass.
It is fairly comical looking, but it works better than the many weed
vaporization devices on the market.
Brink
Hi Brink,
I agree with you about the smoking.
The person I mentioned in the column who uses
Cannabis as a safer, more effective, and non-addictive
alternative to prescription antidepressants uses a vaporizer and says
it's much better.
I've held back so far. I have no moral or ethical
problem with using medical marijuana, am convinced that THC and other
cannabinoids are effective medication, and would like to see it
legalized and treated the same as alcohol regulation-wise.
However, I do try to stay within the law, even when I
disagree with it. Makes life less complicated. ;-)
We'll see how things go with the fibromyalgia.
Thanks for the tip and mini-tutorial.
Charles
Bamboo Bikes and Notebooks
From Andrew in response to Of Bamboo Bikes, Notebooks, and
Other Things:
Charles,
Wow, that's keen! I've long wished to see the many potentials of
bamboo appreciated and used here in the West, as it has been in Asia.
My 30+ year old Motobecane bicycle has given me fine service, but its
traditional 15-speed, high-bar "racer" style is not so practical for my
urban transportation needs, and I've been thinking about a replacement;
I'll definitely look into these bamboo models (produced right next door
in Colorado).
The bamboo laptop looks like fun, though $2,000 ($1,759 at Amazon)
is a little much to pay for a lark. I saw one review that said the feel
of the bamboo trackpad beat even the glass trackpad on the Unibody
MacBooks. A bamboo keyboard (don't see why not, though I guess it would
be pretty labor intensive) would have been really neat.
Andrew
Hi Andrew,
Glad you enjoyed the article.
Motobecane, eh? My wife, who was born and brought up
in Bermuda, had a Motobecane Mobylette moped there before we were
married (one of her sisters inherited it after). It was a cool little
machine. I used it quite a bit when I spent six weeks there in the
spring and summer of 1974 prior to our wedding. Its 50 cc engine was no
ball of fire, but I could coax 40 mph out of it on straight stretches
along the South Shore highway, which was double the speed limit.
I like the feel of bamboo, so I expect the reviewer's
assessment about the bamboo trackpad is accurate, although as you say,
the price of those bamboo laptops is a bit daunting. If they were Macs,
though....
Charles
Go to Charles Moore's Mailbag index.