Do We Ban App Distractions, Too?

I know not every iPhone owner likes or uses Siri, but I use her constantly. Some commands I use daily, like the alarm commands (“Wake me at 7:30”), app-opening commands (“open Calendar”) and calling commands (“Call my mom”).

I just can't understand why anybody would prefer to do those tasks the long way: wake the phone, swipe to unlock, enter the password, hunt around for the app, open it and then begin the transaction.

Recently, I've started using another command, one I'd forgotten about: “Read my messages.” When your phone chimes to let you know that somebody has texted you, “read my messages” makes Siri read the whole thing to you aloud. “Message from Casey Robin: ‘I'm running late. Can you order me a salad?' You can reply, or read that again.”

At which point you can reply by voice, if you want.

I already know the kind of response I'll get to this post. Because a couple of weeks ago, I wrote ab out walkie-talkie apps like Voxer and HeyTell. I pointed out that walkie-talkieing is much safer than texting when you're driving, because you never have to take your eyes off the road.

I was promptly slapped down by the zero-tolerance club:

As the president of a large bicycle club, I am extremely sensitive to distracted driving, and how it inflicts injuries and death.
In your recent article, you wrote: “If you're driving, walkie-talkie communication is far safer than texting. You never have to look at the phone.”

You imply that some distractions are safer than others. The truth is that distracted driving kills and maims, no matter what level, e.g. hands-free talking, etc. It's been proven. The numbers are in.

Please represent this activity as the killer it is in your articles. You should know better.

There's software on the market that can shut down cellphones. This is something you could promote.

Actuall y, as I wrote back to my correspondent, I'm well aware of the dangers of distracted driving, and I've written about them often. (I've even reviewed the apps to which he refers, the ones that automatically disable your phone when you're driving.)

Our disagreement boils down to this: Do we accept that some people will text and drive no matter what, and work to minimize the distraction?

Or do we think that that such mitigation measures will only encourage more distracted driving?

This is a familiar debate. It comes up in other areas of society. Do we accept that young people will have sex no matter what, and distribute free condoms to minimize unwanted pregnancy and disease? Or will that just encourage more underage sex, so we should focus on encouraging abstinence?

Do we accept that some people will use illegal drugs, and distribute free needles to minimize the spread of AIDS? Or do we think that free needles will just encourage them?

I suppose yo u can pretty much guess which side of the texting argument I take: So far, no matter how many awful statistics and videos we've shown our teenagers, they continue to text in the car. And I still struggle to believe that while you're piloting a two-ton projectile at high speed, speaking into a walkie-talkie with your eyes on the road is as dangerous as looking down at the phone.

Still, I fully, deeply understand both viewpoints.

What would probably make the zero-tolerance gang happier - and me, too, I guess - is a world where cellphones couldn't text while the car is in motion. But that won't happen any time soon; the apps that block texting in motion are riddled with problems.

For example, these apps can't distinguish whether you're a driver or a passenger, so they also prevent passengers from texting, which is going to be a tough sell. These apps also lock up your phone when you're on a train or bus, which is a tad unnecessary.

Above all, these apps work only on GPS-equipped smartphones, like iPhones and Android phones. In other words, text blockers won't run on the hundreds of millions of regular dumbphones.

For now, maybe the best solution is making texting while driving illegal, as it already is in 39 states (and the District of Columbia). That way, we don't even have to have this debate. I'm happy, because there's a legitimate reason for people to take the “don't text” plea seriously; the zero-tolerance fans are happy, because, well, there's zero tolerance.

In the meantime, I'll still ask Siri to “read my messages” while my attention is on the road. Yes, of course, any kind of distraction is worse than none. But hearing one sentence read aloud seems to be the least of our automotive distractions - we also have to worry about car stereos, GPS units, passenger conversation and even everyday mind-wandering. The deprivation-tank automobile is still, I'm afraid, a fantasy.