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

131–140 of 197 posts

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#131

Post by lopis »

pas wrote: post #121
data-ottawa wrote: post #108

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 dich…

what would be a better alternative color? to me the placement seems substantially different from the reversing light (which is usually more toward the middle of the back) of course these pictures probably don't tell much about how it will actually look like in traffic, but some kind of pattern seems to be the way to go (that's recognizable from 2-3 cars afar in a traffic jam, for example if folks are curious WTF that…

The alternative is a light in a predictable position or with a standard shape. I really hate that EVs are trying to be all modern about light systems redesigns. Specially in the US, car manufacturers are being very creative with their new designs in ways that are not even legal in Europe. I hope international standards for human-friendly lights can be agreed upon soon.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#133

Post by zoklet-enjoyer »

coolspot wrote: post #132
zoklet-enjoyer wrote: post #77

So I can add turquoise lights to my car and nobody will think I'm texting and driving?

You can also add red blinkers and everyone will think you’re firetruck.

No. That doesn't make sense. Turquoise lights are the new standard to identify self driving cars. That means in the near future there will be more models with self driving capabilities than the average person will be able to keep track of. If I put turquoise lights on my newer Subaru, it isn't unreasonable to think that other drivers will think that I have a self driving car. I can't imagine there will ever be a Subaru Impreza used to help fight fires.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#134

Post by shepherdjerred »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #115
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.

I'm not the GP, but newer Hyundais seem to do a good job at this as well. And by extension this probably applies to Kias too.

Hyundais are fantastic. Their self-steering and adaptive cruise both work really well in high and low speed situations on highways.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#135

Post by gnicholas »

worthless-trash wrote: post #23
gnicholas wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hypothetically, yes. But Mercedes’ tech only works on certain roads, which may not have stop lights or stop signs.

Great, so now we need to think about how AI is going to act.

This is inevitable. With human drivers, I check to see if they are looking at me, or at least in my direction, before turning across them. There will need to be some way for autonomous vehicles to signal to other drivers, pedestrians, etc. that the vehicle know they’re there.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#136

Post by kibwen »

AFAIK Mercedes is the only automaker with the nads to take legal liability for their autopilot.

That's the table stakes: legal liability. I don't want to hear any other automaker, Tesla or otherwise, crow about their "self-driving" tech if they don't take legal liability for it, because it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that they don't have faith in their system. Kudos to Mercedes.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#137

Post by JumpCrisscross »

bombcar wrote: post #64
idopmstuff wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Many cars have autosteer at that level, once my silly minivan is on the freeway it can lane follow and adaptive cruise can go down to zero if necessary, and knows the speed limit and adjusts as necessary.

My Subaru Outback’s auto steer is frankly more capable than my Dad’s Tesla’s. It’s quieter and, due to having radar, more capable.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#138

Post by nullhole »

greggsy wrote: post #124
data-ottawa wrote: post #108

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 dich…

In Australia, cars have red rear lights on at all times, so it’s easy to distinguish a reversing car or a headlight. Also, aren’t all cars now required to have front on driving lights in most jurisdictions, separate to headlights?

Do you mean that the daytime running lights for all new cars include both front (white) and rear (red) lights?

If so, that's a good precedent for other jurisdictions. A longstanding gripe of mine has been that, in Canada at least, new cars are only required to have front lights illuminated in daytime, afaik. The practical effect is that it is a regular occurrence to have dangerous situations where cars with no rear lights illuminated are driving in dim / rainy conditions.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#139

Post by nerdponx »

delecti wrote: post #125
nerdponx wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should still pull you over for that. Pilot's don't get to watch an in-flight movie just because autopilot is on.

The legality of a pilot watching a movie is irrelevant to the discussion. It's legal for the person in the driver's seat to watch a movie with Mercedes' level 3 "Drive Pilot" active (in certain locations). A cop pulling you over is only wasting the time of everyone involved.

And I argue that it should not be legal, just as it's not legal for a pilot: https://www.theverge.com/2014/2/11/5402484/new-faa-rule-keep...

A car at even 20 MPH has a tremendous amount of kinetic energy, and we are all well aware of the destructive consequences of rapid deceleration when large amounts of energy are involved, particularly when fleshy human bodies are involved. There exists no other system with anything close to a comparable level of risk where we do not require or at least expect a human to be actively monitoring the system and ready to take action in the event of a problem.

I'm not saying we should ban Level whatever auto magic AI driving. All I'm saying is that we should use the same standards of responsible operation that we apply to literally every other area of human activity. Why does driving get a free pass?

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#140

Post by unethical_ban »

vic-traill wrote: post #19
takumo wrote: post #8

I think this idea makes some sense, in a mixed-traffic world where some vehicles are autonomous and others are not, some indication that a vehicle is driving autonomously is useful information to everyone around them. Additional situational information, provided it is not overly intrusive or overwhelming is generally beneficial. As for the colour, clearly Mercedes requested Turquoise for brand reasons. I wonder if th…

> some indication that a vehicle is driving autonomously is useful information to everyone around them I'm genuinely curious - what are you thinking when you say this? I don't know what I'd do with that information. It shouldn't make me drive differently - e.g. not be aggressive to see if I can invoke reaction(s) in the autonomous system, and I should already be driving w/ due care.

That is literally half the content of the article. Explaining the answer to the question you're asking.
Post reply on HN