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

Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

jalopnik.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 197 posts

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#101

Post by ricardobayes »

flutas wrote: post #52
infecto wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not too surprising given the very specific conditions Mercedes runs in.

Yeah Currently - Only in CA and NV - Only below 40mph - Only on specifically mapped freeways ("only available on freeways that have been mapped by Mercedes") - There MUST be a vehicle in front of your car - "reasonable road conditions with readable markings and lines" - "clear weather" - Daytime only ("Drive Pilot can’t be used at night or in the rain, and the headlights and wipers must be set to auto for it to work.…

Interested to see how it performs in Nevada, Botts' dots can be confusing to self-driving AI models learned on normal highway stripes/lane markings. The Vegas strip notably has very limited lane markings.

The requirement to have a car in front of you is also very interesting.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#102

Post by lebean »

idopmstuff wrote: post #62
nixass wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Surprised to learn it's not tesla Actually anyone even slightly interested in automotive industry isn't surprised by this. Tesla's tech is all smoke and mirrors for years now

I find this to be such a weird take - I just drove from San Diego -> LA with my Tesla doing 90+% of the freeway driving (I only have the free autosteer, so I have to handle exits, etc.). I have been in multiple rides through SF in friends' Teslas where they did not have to intervene at any point. Is Tesla FSD ready to replace human drivers? It is not. Is it smoke and mirrors? No - there is a mountain of evidence that…

I agree with this guy. Tesla FSD isn't smoke and mirrors! It's made of sensors and computers n stuff! Making this out of mirrors would be impractical, let alone smoke.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#103

Post by tstenner »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #98
dylan604 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the same reason they have the signs that say Student Driver. It lets everyone else know that this car might do something totally unexpected as the car is being controlled by a totally inexperienced operator.

Insurance frauds would target those vehicles.

"Caution, this car is recording massive amounts of data and will have the entire car makers legal department behind it in case of a crash"

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#105

Post by bhelkey »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #98
dylan604 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the same reason they have the signs that say Student Driver. It lets everyone else know that this car might do something totally unexpected as the car is being controlled by a totally inexperienced operator.

Insurance frauds would target those vehicles.

Would they? I imagine those cars would be almost guaranteed to record the entire encounter.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#106

Post by 1123581321 »

KingOfCoders wrote: post #92
1123581321 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have an Odyssey (the best minivan), I take it? I think that's the only one that can properly lane center. Other vans just have lane exit prevention. There are some differences between Honda's and Tesla's implementations that Tesla owners appreciate.

Tesla van owners?

Owners of the 3, S, X or Y, I believe.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#107

Post by jessriedel »

satiric wrote: post #6

Blue lights are banned on cars in lots of places (so that you don't look like a cop car). I'm assuming SAE has thought of this already? It doesn't look too similar to the bright blue lights on cop cars, but still.

It's a light, slightly green shade of blue (turquoise), which looks very different than the deep dark blue of emergency lights.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#108

Post by data-ottawa »

As mentioned in the previous thread, I'm not pleased with this colour.

For red-green colourblind people (both types), this colour is at the neutral point where both available cones are saturated and the brain can't differentiate it from white light.

In their study paper they used a much more blue turquoise, decided it was confusing, and then moved it to a more green version (thus saturating the non-blue cone for dichromats) but did not reassess the new green-turquoise colour.

The net effect is that for something like 8% of men this light looks exactly the same as the white reversing lights and is placed exactly where reversing lights are.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#110

Post by ginko »

simondotau wrote: post #16

An autonomous driving system is either good enough to drive on our roads without supervision — or it's not. If it is good enough, it shouldn't matter whether others know if the driver isn't human. Any unsupervised driving system is likely to be around two orders of magnitude safer than a human driver.[0] So effectively they're special lights to tell others that a car is extremely safe. This will backfire horribly. Wh…

>Pedestrians will step onto the road in front of them.

Pedestrians SHOULD be able to just step onto the road on a crosswalk without having to worry if drivers will stop as they're legally required to.

Post reply on HN