Please make a dumb car • Hacker News Board

Re: Please make a dumb car

#481

Post by maxdo » Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 9:05 PM UTC

Typical retrograde article with a narrative I wish everything be like in good old days with no connection to reality.

The main message is super pathetic.

It claim simplicity but yet targets ICE car. The amount of parts in ICE vs any complicated EV is at least 3 times less. Sometimes more. So you just shift the complexity of running and driving super complex combustion engine towards your safety and comfort in EV and still car is 3 times simpler.

1. So one of points was no GPS. Who want to rely on your phone to know if you able to make to the charging station? What if you forget your phone and you're in the middle of highway deep in the forest?

2. Music. That's not even fun. Aux oh, yeah, how about ~1 billion people with iphone that doesn't have Aux. What if I want to play my music from my apple watch? And good luck managing several bluetooth devices with no screen. And what if some people doesn't want to rely on their device for such a basic thing as music? Really wiring your car with cords to charge your phone, connect aux, mount the phone is the way to make your car simple???? Are you serious?

3. Manual seat control. It seems like every argument in article is a denial of " i hate opinion and need of other people, I want my particular car". If 2 people or more own the same car, they want to adjust it automatically, including mirrors. I bet most of them will be happy to seat in a car, it read their profile from phone in the pocket, adjust seats temp etc including while driving out from drive way. That's already done in tesla including doors. No clicks at all. Screen is used when you need to change predefine settings. Even that can be altered via voice. Btw using voice is also more safe.

4. Climate control zoning. Same thing. How about people want it blow differently with different temp not for a different average temp in the cabin but for different feeling.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#482

Post by asdff » Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 9:07 PM UTC

salawat wrote: post #174

lacogubik wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what they are implying is that car with so many safety features should be able to handle this situation. Volvo has lot of "collision avoidance" safety features, so one would expect that they could handle this as well. This is common feature in other cars - I rented mazda few years back and it did automatically stop when I almost reversed into another car.

At that point, the driver really is to blame though. Manufacturer's job is to make things affordably; not to save himanity from themselves despite the ongoing insistance by governments that somehow the industrial sector should take on the onus for technically enforcing whatever measures that some bureaucrat sets their sights on today. This mentality that the car should make up for fundamental defects in safe driving…

Its' not some impossible ask here. My 16k yaris beeps then brakes the car when going forwards into an obstacle. Why cant a 56k volvo do the same in reverse? It definitely has this technology, I think its mandated now, but seems to me OP is saying volvo didn't bother putting it on the reverse side of the car. Which is a little bewildering that a car manufacturer might consider a reverse collision impossible, and makes you wonder what other common sense safety things they've screwed up as well, or opted to knowingly not include to improve their bottom line.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#483

Post by mikewarot » Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 9:10 PM UTC

It wouldn't be that hard to come up with a standard set of controls, buttons, knobs, sliders, that could be used everywhere, but conform to a standard data bus protocol, so that you wouldn't have to have miles of wire in every vehicle.

Such components would allow for the cost savings of control by wire, without the danger of control by screen.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#484

Post by asdff » Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 9:10 PM UTC

aitchnyu wrote: post #132

khazhoux wrote: post #74

Our Volvo doesn't let you adjust the volume when you're in reverse. That means if you're backing out of the garage and the music is blaring -- you can't turn it off! The Volvo UI pops up an almost full-display warning when it can't connect to the phone over bluetooth on startup. This UI takes priority over the rear camera . So I guess it's better to hit Timmy and his puppy when I'm backing out, so long as I know my p…

My Toyota's head unit bulldozes to reverse mode and if I was in reverse for 10 seconds, the song resumes 10 seconds as if its been playing in the background.

My Toyotas head unit has similar behavior issues. It will connect to bluetooth and start playing the song as soon as you turn on the car, only no music will come out of the speakers until you pause the song, then press play. Why do I have to manually "wake up" the speakers instead of the head unit? Probably because this software took one engineer no more than a week to write before it was shipped out full of these annoyances that would have been avoided had you, you know, tested out connecting a blutooth device to the head unit before production even just once.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#485

Post by Tade0 » Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 9:12 PM UTC

asdff wrote: post #471

stillsut wrote: post #179

I went car shopping this year in the new market and found that that if you want more a "dumb" car (UX occurs primarily outside of a touchscreen, no internet, no geolocation) you lose all potential for any nice non-smart features. So no heated/powered seats, no power windows, the material of the interior is refurbished from a spirit airlines airplane, etc. I think manufacturers are hoping that certain aspects of the m…

The old notion that sensors always go bad in cars was never really accurate. People would see a check engine light, get the code read and see it says "O2 sensor" and replace the O2 sensor. Then the code happens again, they say "That damned O2 sensor on this stupid car" and replace the O2 sensor again. Rinse and repeat until you get a new car. However, I'm willing to bet the O2 sensor was actually giving the correct r…

I saw an O2 sensor go bad in my car. Only difference comparing to a brand new one was that the reading was changing very slowly.

No check engine light though.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#486

Post by gitowiec » Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 9:13 PM UTC

In my Mercedes C180, year 2011 the AC zones really work and I have the knobs! With automatic gear (unusual in my country) and turbo, it really feels premium! And I bought it really cheap, as a second owner.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#487

Post by systemvoltage » Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 9:13 PM UTC

sinab wrote: post #440

What I hate about "car discourse" like this is the apparent blindness to public transportation. Trains, bikes, buses, and street cars solve almost every problem that the author complains about. The only outstanding problem, however, is that American infrastructure has been deliberately designed solely around the car. Those who suggest alternative modes of public transportation are immediately written off as "impracti…

What!? I have friends that live in Switzerland and value having a car. Wait until people realize that Europe has millions of cars. It’s not to downplay PT, which is awesome as well but this is just a delusion.

If anything, this is a distraction from real UX issues with cars. Classic switcheroo - “Lets not focus on improving cars because public transportation”. Infuriating, as if car UI/UX wasn’t infuriating enough!

Re: Please make a dumb car

#488

Post by asdff » Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 9:15 PM UTC

drdaeman wrote: post #391

breakpointalpha wrote: post #193

Bought a Mazda CX5 a few months ago. Thank god Mazda currently has the "driver first" mentality. NO Touchscreen! Main input is through a comfortable knob in front of the arm rest, where your hand naturally lands when resting. Gauge cluster is digital, but analog type dials for spedo, etc. AC, Power Cool/heated seats, driver assists, auto-park, all controlled via BUTTONS! It's a modern miracle and one of the big reaso…

> but analog type dials for spedo Why is this considered an upside? When I shopped for a car, I've specifically looked for one with a simple (uncluttered) large digital number-only speedometer. Ended up buying 2013 Civic, which is still bad in other regards but got this one right, with a large digital speedometer conveniently located not behind the steering wheel but right below the windshield (less eye travel; and s…

It makes it easy to glance at your speed. Straight up is 60mph on my car. 9 o clock is 35mph or so. Split the difference and I'm at 45 without having to actually look out from my peripheral vision and take my eyes off the road.

Re: Please make a dumb car

#489

Post by otterley » Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 9:16 PM UTC

parkingrift wrote: post #447

tsujp wrote: post #41

One thing I was flabbergasted at recently was Tesla offering, and the government allowing, regular drivers to use a yoke steering wheel like F1 drivers. Not only is it harder for the average person to handle but their firmware hadn't accounted for the fact that if you steer fully left or right the yoke is upside down and if you try and indicate it ends up indicating on the wrong side. What is wrong with a wheel and f…

I've not seen any evidence that the yoke steering wheel is dangerous. The downside that you're describing can only happen at zero or near to zero speed. BMW doesn't even install turn signals at all so I think the occasional errant turn signal is fine. The reason the NHTSA hasn't "forbid" the yoke is because... it isn't unsafe, it's just stupid. It would be significantly less stupid if it had physical buttons on the s…

> BMW doesn't even install turn signals at all

I realize there's a joke in Germany about this, but to be clear, all passenger vehicles sold in the U.S. must have working turn signals. See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2004-title49-vol5/xm...

Re: Please make a dumb car

#490

Post by Johnny555 » Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 9:16 PM UTC

rsync wrote: post #448

Johnny555 wrote: post #256

I don't mind having a smart car, in fact, I like most of the "smart" features - lane centering, adaptive cruise, emergency braking, TPMS, lane change cameras, auto headlights, auto wipers, etc. But I want buttons and knobs for everything I use while driving. I probably wouldn't pay extra for built-in navigation (it generally comes with other options that I do want), but I've found it useful a few times when I was out…

"I like most of the "smart" features - lane centering, adaptive cruise, emergency braking ..." Please drive your car. I don't care what choices you make wrt bluetooth or heated seats or iphone integration ... but if you can't be bothered to drive the car then perhaps a different transport option would be a better choice for you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ESJH1NLMLs "... as we look at this accident history what…

I'm not sure that aviation automation is directly comparable to the current state of driver assistance features.

You should be more concerned with what I'm doing bluetooth than whether or not I let the car keep a safe following distance from the car in front of me since if I'm in a heated discussion with my ex on the phone, I'm paying a lot less attention to the road than I should be, and I'd be better off letting the car do most of the driving.

None of the driver assistance features I listed above allow hands-off driving, if ACC fails, my car will slow down, or maybe get too close to the car in front of me, but since I've already got my hands on the wheel and looking ahead, it's not a big deal.

The poor state of automation for most cars actually ensures better driver attention -- LKAS works around 80% of the time on the freeways. If it worked 99% of the time, I'd be less focused on driving.

But even looking at airplanes, even if automation is implicated in some portion of accidents, is that worse than if pilots have to actively fly the entire time and end up exhausted by the end of a cross country flight when it comes time to land and they need to be at their best.