Safety Group Says GM’s In-Car Shopping App Encourages Distracted Driving

By | December 12, 2017

  • December 12, 2017 at 2:25 pm
    Dances With Wolves says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 0

    What next? This is so distracting. If the feds can’t handle it, let’s go to the state legislatures.

  • December 12, 2017 at 2:34 pm
    Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 2

    Buy GM cell addicts and you will be even more addicted.

  • December 12, 2017 at 2:47 pm
    Rosenblatt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 6
    Thumb down 1

    In my past few vehicles, all the in-dash features similar to the one referenced in the article (such as “search for points of interest on your route” or “check-in on Facebook” or “do a google search”) have all been ***deactivated when the car is in motion.***

    Even the settings page for the multi-feature display between the speedometer and tachometer are **inaccessible when the car is in motion.**

    Can anyone tell me if GM’s technology has the same protection so that the “in-car shopping app” would NOT be able to be used if the car is moving?

    I feel that would resolve many of the complaints that this will increase distracted driving …. if you can’t use the feature when you’re driving, it can’t distract you while you’re driving.

    • December 12, 2017 at 3:03 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 10

      Rosenblatt, try reading the story before commenting. Obviously, the safety people did and that is why they concluded the app is distracting. People don’t need to be reading apps on the display while they are driving, pure and simple.

      • December 12, 2017 at 3:31 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 7
        Thumb down 0

        1) I agree people shouldn’t be reading apps while driving

        2) I read the article first, buddy. It doesn’t answer my question.

        The article says “…it’s designed in accordance with voluntary driver-distraction guidelines agreed to by car companies”

        My car also allows for the driver to interact when behind the wheel, but it’s ****restricted to the vehicle being stationary.****

        That’s why my question is about if or how GM does or doesn’t restrict this type of interaction.

        • December 12, 2017 at 4:05 pm
          Agent says:
          Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 10

          Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • December 12, 2017 at 4:17 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 0

            1) I agree people should keep their fingers off the screen when they’re driving

            2) I wasn’t speculating – I was asking for clarification.

            3) If you cannot answer my question, please stop replying.

          • December 13, 2017 at 10:16 am
            Fair Playing Field says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 10
            Thumb down 0

            To see Agent objecting to another reader “speculating” on the content of an IJ article is ironic to say the least, given that the majority of his posts are of a speculative nature, and often unrelated to the topic at hand.

        • December 13, 2017 at 3:34 pm
          Agent says:
          Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 10

          Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • December 13, 2017 at 4:45 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 10
            Thumb down 0

            I’ve already asked you nicely once — please stop commenting about my post if you can’t answer the question I’ve asked.

  • December 13, 2017 at 9:00 pm
    Fair Playing Field says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Agent,

    It’s an open forum, my indignant friend, and it could use more intelligent on-topic conversation such as that fostered by Rosenblatt’s contributions. (c:

  • December 14, 2017 at 9:49 am
    SafetyConcern says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 0

    I don’t see why we are questioning the “safety groups” analysis. I’m not a safety expert myself, but if a group named “safety” expresses concerns about a danger in a vehicle, I’m inclined to listen and likely oblige whatever their recommendations are. Auto manufacturers in the past have known about defects in their vehicles and have ignored them at the cost of people’s lives. If a safety group is expressing concerns, we should listen and act on their advice for the sake of our friends and family.

    • December 14, 2017 at 11:03 am
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 0

      I’m not questioning the analysis nor saying auto manufacturers always put the best interests of people ahead of profits. I am curious if GM (like Honda and most other car manufacturers) made the system inoperable if the vehicle is in motion.

      “it’s designed in accordance with voluntary driver-distraction guidelines agreed to by car companies”

      What are those guidelines? What did GM agree to do? Why was the system deemed unsafe if it meets the D-D guidelines? That is the type information I’m trying to ascertain.

    • December 14, 2017 at 12:16 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 8

      SafetyConcern, you are correct. Some on this blog don’t want to believe them for whatever reason. People with Common Sense already know we have a distracted driver problem in this country and the Auto Industry does not need to add to it.

      • December 14, 2017 at 1:18 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 7
        Thumb down 0

        1) I already said I believe them

        2) I already said (twice) that I agree distracted driving is a problem and people need to keep their hands of their screens

        3) Therefore, thank you for confirming I have common sense (not sarcasm)



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*