Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

jalopnik.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 448 posts

Re: Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

#261

Post by jen20 »

giardini wrote: post #218
ashtonkem wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they’re working, and if there isn’t something obstructing their view, like another vehicle or fog. Generally it’s best to design vehicle signaling with an assumption that situations are not ideal, just in case.

Result: night-time accidents, especially in fog. Drivers will see a single flashing taillight arrow and make incorrect assumptions. Very severe and fatal collisions and consequential lawsuits will ensue. Cooper will pay, pay, pay. They will issue recalls and beg for leniency. But there is no doubt they f*cked this design. If one of the two tail lights and/or a brake light(s) is/are out then the situation will only be…

If it’s on a British road, said self-driving car will see normal yellow indicators, since red is not a permissible colour. As mentioned in the article.

Re: Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

#262

Post by wiether »

MerelyMortal wrote: post #6

> Mini has not heard any concerns from customers regarding the rear turn indicators I wouldn't expect them to: they cannot see their own turn signal lights while driving. If they happen to be behind another Mini, they already know about it and it may not throw them off-guard like others who aren't familiar with it.

> Mini has not heard any concerns from customers regarding the rear turn indicators

That perfectly summarize the car industry. Manufacturers only care about the people in the car. It's not their problem if their car are death machines for everyone outside.

Re: Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

#263

Post by bruce343434 »

lostlogin wrote: post #167
thesuperbigfrog wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> when seeing the full rear of the car, I suppose the Mini designers have never driven in fog, poor lighting, storms, or at night? (When you might not see the full rear of the car) Imagine if you can only see the car's taillights and you see a blinking arrow move the opposite way it points. What would you think you saw? Or better yet, if one of the taillights is out, what would a driver behind the Mini think?

> Imagine if you can only see the car's taillights and you see a blinking arrow move the opposite way it points. What would you think you saw? If conditions were that bad and you saw a ‘normal’ indicator flash it would be a 50/50 guess which way it was going. That’s better I suppose but hardly good.

Now it's a 0/0 guess because you wrongly guess the arrow to point in the direction.

Re: Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

#264

Post by noneeeed »

mthoms wrote: post #181

Mini’s statement only highlights the absurdity (emphasis mine): >With regard to the turn indicator light pattern, there should be no trouble at all for a driver to understand, when seeing the full rear of the car , which direction is being indicated So what about when you can only see half of the car? Like when it’s changing lanes or pulling out of a parking spot? You know, like those times when a signal is MOST usef…

Even if I could see the full back of the car I think I'd still risk a brain-fart. It's like a driving Stroop Test (where words like "blue" are shown but you have to say what colour they are shown in, not what colour they say).

Re: Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

#265

Post by pests »

chrisseaton wrote: post #17
malyk wrote: post #11

So the left turn signal is an arrow pointing to the right? And the right turn signal is an arrow pointing to the left? How does that pass, well, anything at all without someone saying “that might not be the best idea”!

How could anyone be confused? They’re on the side the car is turning - like every other turn signal you’ve seen in your entire life.

Just looking at the video in the tweet had me slightly confused. Arrows are powerful.

It's like those puzzles or quiz's or whatnot that have the word "red" written in a blue font. Of course everyone can read the word, but in split second decisions the brain is going to grab whichever details it can.

Re: Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

#266

Post by Retric »

avemg wrote: post #248
mthoms wrote: post #181

Mini’s statement only highlights the absurdity (emphasis mine): >With regard to the turn indicator light pattern, there should be no trouble at all for a driver to understand, when seeing the full rear of the car , which direction is being indicated So what about when you can only see half of the car? Like when it’s changing lanes or pulling out of a parking spot? You know, like those times when a signal is MOST usef…

The design is dumb but you’re really stretching. I don’t need to see the entire rear of the car to know which way the blinker is indicating. If I did then that would mean 99% of the cars on the road, which have no arrow at all, would suffer from this ambiguity.

The issue is if you only see 1/2 the car people are going to make the wrong assumption rather than not knowing. You really don’t want confusion when driving multi ton vehicles at highway speeds.

Re: Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

#267

Post by oblio »

Johnny555 wrote: post #236

I just checked our new 2022 Mini SE EV, and fortunately, it doesn't have this design. The turn signal is more like a T rotated 90 degrees with the vertical bar towards the inside of the car. But I do wish it had amber turn signals, I don't know why the USA doesn't make that the standard since it removes all ambiguity with the brake light.

My guess? Inertia, cheapness and laziness.

Inertia = it's always been this way.

Cheapness = it would cost manufacturers a few cents more to retool/find new suppliers.

Laziness = it (kinda) works, why touch it?

This might be the Holy Trinity of Mediocrity, it's everywhere.

Re: Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

#268

Post by reaperducer »

vesrah wrote: post #63
pc86 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't the manufacturer, they're aftermarket. It started (sensibly) with some emergency vehicles having it to make sure to get the attention of the driver[s] behind them. At some point people in high-traffic areas started thinking their 18 year old Corolla was worthy of the same treatment.

Meanwhile, this is standard on some European market cars under heavy braking.

Meanwhile, this is standard on some European market cars under heavy braking.

Instead of blinking the brake lights, some U.S. cars automatically turn on the hazard lights under heavy braking. It's standard on mine.

Re: Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

#269

Post by oblio »

jdavis703 wrote: post #243
kashura wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the root cause is the laughably easy barrier of entry to have a license to drive a death missile? It's a multi faceted issue of course, but to me, getting better educated drivers on the road is by far the easiest problem to solve around driving.

I would say almost everyone knows not to text and drive, or run red lights or to speed. Yet these are all frequent occurrences. Even proposals to add speed or red light cameras (with strict rules to prevent municipal abuse) face heavy opposition. I don’t think education alone will fix traffic safety.

Speed cameras I can (kind of) understand, but what possible reasonable explanation could they have for blocking red light camera installation?

Re: Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever

#270

Post by blendergeek »

oblio wrote: post #269
jdavis703 wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say almost everyone knows not to text and drive, or run red lights or to speed. Yet these are all frequent occurrences. Even proposals to add speed or red light cameras (with strict rules to prevent municipal abuse) face heavy opposition. I don’t think education alone will fix traffic safety.

Speed cameras I can (kind of) understand, but what possible reasonable explanation could they have for blocking red light camera installation?

Many people oppose automated law enforcement in (almost) all forms.
Post reply on HN