Cell-phones will be regulated in CA for drivers starting July 1, 2008:

The first [law] prohibits all drivers from using a handheld wireless telephone while operating a motor vehicle, (Vehicle Code (VC) -23123). Motorists 18 and over may use a “hands-free device.” [The second law states] drivers under the age of 18 may NOT use a wireless telephone or hands-free device while operating a motor vehicle (VC -23124).

The Q&A section is fascinating. Note that texting and dialing are not regulated, only speaking with one hand next to your head.

Q: Does the new “hands-free” law prohibit you from dialing a wireless telephone while driving or just talking on it?
A: The new law does not prohibit dialing, but drivers are strongly urged not to dial while driving.

“Strongly urged”? Compliance authoring is definitely not an exact science.

Q: Will it be legal to use a Bluetooth or other earpiece?
A: Yes, however you cannot have BOTH ears covered.

Q: Does the new “hands-free” law allow you to use the speaker phone function of your wireless telephone while driving?
A: Yes.

Q: Does the new “hands-free” law allow drivers 18 and over to text message while driving?
A: The law does not specifically prohibit that, but an officer can pull over and issue a citation to a driver of any age if, in the officer’s opinion, the driver was distracted and not operating the vehicle safely. Sending text messages while driving is unsafe at any speed and is strongly discouraged.

Texting is surely more dangerous than speaking, as is dialing. I guess it’s a start.

A study has found that routine mistakes are predictable:

Monotonous duties switch our brain to “rest mode”, whether we like it or not, the researchers report in Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences.

They found mistakes can be predicted up to 30 seconds before we make them, by patterns in our brain activity.

Sounds like an Asimov novel is about to come true.

The team hopes to design an early-warning brain monitor for pilots and others in “critical situations”.

The scientists say the device would be particularly suitable for monotonous jobs where focus is hard to maintain – such as passport and immigration control.

Robots handling passport and immigration control? No, this group predicts that they can help people by forcing their brains to stay alert instead of switching to “autopilot”. I wonder if there is a trade-off in terms of risk or health costs.

“Autopilot would be a better metaphor,” he explains. “We can assume that the tendency to economise task performance leads to an inappropriate reduction of effort, thus causing errors.”

Since this state begins about 30 seconds prior to a mistake being made, it could be possible to design an early-warning system that alerts people to be more focused or more careful, said the researchers.

Alternatively, maybe human jobs could be made less monotonous so that the brain is not tempted to economize? What if, for example, people were rotated and given shorter shifts, with more breaks?

The AP reports that the US Army has this year enlisted nearly double the number of convicted felons as last year. The Pentagon is said to believe that a “thorough” review can overturn prior convictions:

For example, in several of the Marine sex crime cases, the offender was a teenager involved in consensual sex with another underage teen. In one Army case, a 13-year-old who threw a match into his school locker was charged with arson and had to receive a felony waiver six years later.

“Waivers are used judiciously and granted only after a thorough review,” said Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Jonathan Withington.

He added that “low unemployment, a protracted war on terror, a decline in propensity to serve,” and the growing reluctance of parents, teachers and other adults to recommend young people go into the military, has made recruiting a challenge.

Who would have thought the Army would be leading the way in consensual sex rights? I mean what if it had been same sex? Something tells me in that case they might say rules are rules.

Ok, so a kid threw a match into a locker. The question is what flammable or explosive material was in the locker. I don’t think you can judge such a situation on the lighting mechanism alone, can you?

I understand most of the reasons for recruiting challenges that are mentioned, and they are certainly hard to measure, but does he really mean to say unemployment is low? A quick check of the “Employment Situation Summary” at the US Bureau of Labor Statistics suggests high unemployment:

The number of unemployed persons increased by 434,000 to 7.8 million in March, and the unemployment rate rose by 0.3 percentage point to 5.1 percent. Since March 2007, the number of unemployed persons has increased by 1.1 million, and the unemployment rate has risen by 0.7 percentage point.

The unemployment low in the US was around 3.5% in 2000, according to the Sacramento Forecast Project but now it is clearly trending above 5%. Kennedy once said that full employment is 4%, but I just don’t see what the Pentagon spokesman is pointing towards.