Congratulations, Mini, you made the stupidest turn signals ever • Hacker News Board

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

#361

Post by p1necone » Mon, Sep 27, 2021, 12:56 AM UTC

thiht wrote: post #216

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…

> 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 useful? You either see which side of the car you're seeing, or you don't and the shape of the light doesn't matter. When you drive, you don't interpret the light of the turn signal, you interpret where it is. For me that's one thing that looks stupid o…

These lights are in the shape of an arrow pointing the wrong way, if it's nighttime it's going to confuse the hell out of you.

Even if it's daytime it's probably going to be confusing for a few hundred milliseconds too, and that's enough to cause accidents.

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

#362

Post by toast0 » Mon, Sep 27, 2021, 1:00 AM UTC

selestify wrote: post #249

rconti wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure they do, but as a car enthusiast, we're forever frustrated, because the number of people who care is simply miniscule. I always bought used cars and it's frustrating that, of course, the manufacturers/dealers only care about people buying new. But now, having bought a new car, I realize they STILL don't care about my opinion, because people who care about the car-like-appliances they buy are in such a minori…

Why are people in such a rush to get their cars? I understand if your old one broke down and you absolutely need one for a job ASAP, but if you can afford to buy a new car, surely you could afford to wait a bit to get exactly the car you want?

I ordered a car in 2016, and the process is terrible. For one thing, the local dealers didn't seem interested at all, so I had to drive 30 miles away to a dealer that was willing to make an easy sale.

Then, the options really aren't there anyway, depending on the brand. If I want the safety features, I'm also getting 'premium wheels' which I don't want, the gps navigation time capsule because h I'm not paying $100 to update that, and 70 speakers. And it didn't actually come like we ordered anyway (it was pretty close though, had the vacuum cleaner when we wanted a spare tire, managed to find a spot to squeeze in a spare tire). And after all that, it still took 90 minutes to pick up the car when it showed up 3ish months later.

It's much easier to take a car that's already on the lot. Manufacturer's websites are pretty good at finding inventory that's close to what you really want, and you just deal with that.

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

#363

Post by userbinator » Mon, Sep 27, 2021, 1:02 AM UTC

dunco wrote: post #346

Lenovo have committed a similar crime with their camera shutter design that includes the red dot from the thinkpad logo, totally ignoring that a red dot/light in the context of a camera has been used to indicate a recording state for a long time. Lenovo's Camera is in the off/disabled/shuttered position when the red dot is visible. Although of little consequence in reality, the idea that some exec thought this would…

totally ignoring that a red dot/light in the context of a camera has been used to indicate a recording state for a long time

That's a separate recording light, not a red dot right in front of the lens.

Lenovo's Camera is in the off/disabled/shuttered position when the red dot is visible.

I've never found this confusing, and in fact the red dot covering the lens makes it more obvious that the shutter is deployed.

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

#364

Post by jdavis703 » Mon, Sep 27, 2021, 1:08 AM UTC

oblio wrote: post #307

blendergeek wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people oppose automated law enforcement in (almost) all forms.

Why, for this specific case?

Taking devil’s advocate here, but people claim that automated enforcement has equity concerns, privacy concerns and immigration concerns. Again, these aren’t my arguments, but:

There’s concern that automated enforcement is a regressive punishment that unduly burdens low-income motorists. There’s a belief that these cameras will be concentrated in low-income or minority neighborhoods.

The privacy concerns are fairly obvious, people are concerned the government is building a database of vehicle locations.

And the immigration concerns are that information could be fed back to ICE to detain undocumented immigrants.

However if you read the enabling legislation, a lot of these concerns are addressed through data retention, data sharing and safety standards (i.e. tickets can only be issued at 9 MPH over the limit and there must be a warning sign.)

I also think an unspoken part of the opposition is some people feel they can talk a cop out of writing a ticket, but they can’t argue with a machine.

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

#365

Post by crtasm » Mon, Sep 27, 2021, 1:09 AM UTC

_dain_ wrote: post #329

gokhan wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's this trick question among children here. One makes the other repeat "white" ten times and immediately asks "What do cows drink?". The answer is almost always milk. It might even be working without repeating white part [1]. You should have encountered many situations like this before, simple tasks creating cognitive load, how can't you know what the fuss is? [1] https://slate.com/human-interest/2015/01/what-do…

but cows do drink milk ..

Calves drink milk

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

#366

Post by bluGill » Mon, Sep 27, 2021, 1:15 AM UTC

u801e wrote: post #318

bombcar wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Federal law can override and has done so in cases like seatbelts. But they’ve not bothered for turn signals. If it were to happen CA would likely be the first and then the rest of the country could follow.

Federal law (FMVSS 108) permits red rear turn signals, either combined with the brake lamp or a separate turn signal lamp. Interestingly enough, they require amber color front turn signals because the white ones were difficult to see when the headlamps were illuminated. It's too bad they didn't use the same reasoning for the rear turn signals compared to the stop lamps.

There would be a huge backlash if they tried. Standard trailer connectors combine the brake light with the turn signal. (the brake like turns on both turn signals 100%) Many trucks just send enough wires (which are expensive these days) to run the trailer and tie the taillights off of those.

Thus to require amber to the rear means the standard trailer connector needs to be replaced, then some sort of grade period for old trailers, and - well I doubt I could think of all the complex factors required. In 30 years we might be able to do it.

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

#367

Post by throwaway0a5e » Mon, Sep 27, 2021, 1:20 AM UTC

riazrizvi wrote: post #289

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…

For a car branded for being small, that is now 3x heavier than the original sensational design I would not call this absolute idiocy . It is consistent idiocy .

Cost of compliance but in pounds instead of dollars.

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

#368

Post by throwaway0a5e » Mon, Sep 27, 2021, 1:25 AM UTC

Everyone in here seems to be making the assumption that people will see the arrow and honor it as an arrow instead of subconsciously just seeing tail light and acting accordingly.

Driving is so second nature to the overwhelming majority of drivers that they won't even see the arrow.

If this arrow was orange and 4ft tall like the arrows used to control traffic flow you might have a case.

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

#369

Post by throwaway0a5e » Mon, Sep 27, 2021, 1:28 AM UTC

sbarre wrote: post #85

kalleboo wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What had been a common signal for “you’re a little too close” I've never seen or heard of this. But seeing cars that flash their brake light under heavy/emergency braking is common (typically high-end European brands)

I've commonly seen people just throw on their hazard blinkers in case of drastic braking on the highway... especially in bad weather. I've done it myself when going from regular speed to unexpected traffic, in the hope that the person behind me is paying attention...

If you're suddenly going so much less than the prevailing speed that you're a hazard then turning on your flashers makes sense since that's what they're used for.

Trying to encode extra info into the brake lights is a fools errand.

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

#370

Post by lmm » Mon, Sep 27, 2021, 1:31 AM UTC

thaumasiotes wrote: post #322

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.

>> Per miles driven the US has an average number of traffic deaths. > Maybe the root cause is the laughably easy barrier of entry to have a license to drive a death missile? You're saying we should make driver's licenses punitively difficult to get in order to shift American population structure in the direction of dense settlements? The reason America isn't densely settled is much simpler than that; there aren't ver…

> You're saying we should make driver's licenses punitively difficult to get in order to shift American population structure in the direction of dense settlements?

I don't think there's anything punitive about proportionately strict regulation for something that kills so many people.